Re: [sidekiq] Documentation on Signals
- From:
- Mike Perham
- Date:
- 2012-07-03 @ 02:28
The docs are wrong. Once the timeout has passed, Sidekiq pushes the
jobs back to Redis of any workers that have not finished properly and
then exits the process.
The only time you should actually lose jobs is if Sidekiq is kill -9'd.
On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Darren Boyd <dboyd@realgravity.com> wrote:
> The wiki page says...
>
> https://github.com/mperham/sidekiq/wiki/Signals
>
> "Any workers that do not finish within the timeout are forcefully
> terminated and their messages are lost."
>
> I tested this, and it seems that the message gets pushed back to redis. Did
> I test it wrong, or are the docs wrong? If the latter, I can fix it.
>
> note: this is important to me, since we have a lot of jobs that can take 7-8
> minutes (moving big files on S3).
>
> Thanks,
> Darren
>
Re: [sidekiq] Documentation on Signals
- From:
- Jesse Cooke
- Date:
- 2012-07-02 @ 22:12
What version of Sidekiq are you using?
--------------------------------------------
Jesse Cooke :: N-tier Engineer
jc00ke.com / @jc00ke <http://twitter.com/jc00ke>
On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Darren Boyd <dboyd@realgravity.com> wrote:
> The wiki page says...
>
> https://github.com/mperham/sidekiq/wiki/Signals
>
> "Any workers that do not finish within the timeout are forcefully
> terminated and their messages are lost."
>
> I tested this, and it seems that the message gets pushed back to redis.
> Did I test it wrong, or are the docs wrong? If the latter, I can fix it.
>
> note: this is important to me, since we have a lot of jobs that can take
> 7-8 minutes (moving big files on S3).
>
> Thanks,
> Darren
>
>
Re: [sidekiq] Documentation on Signals
- From:
- Darren Boyd
- Date:
- 2012-07-02 @ 22:32
On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 3:12 PM, Jesse Cooke <jesse@jc00ke.com> wrote:
> What version of Sidekiq are you using?
>
* sidekiq (2.0.3)