Skip to content

Conversation

@Majsvaffla
Copy link

After using this library in production for a while I have found that the current approach of keeping track of failed tasks in a set in memory doesn't work in a satisfactory way. I have multiple workers running jobs from the same queue. Every worker will pick up jobs that are bound to fail. Then, on a restart (i.e. deploy) the set is destroyed and the jobs are up for grabs again. So I thought... why not keep that state in the database on the Job objects themselves?

@gavinwahl
Copy link
Owner

You can use the retry(0) decorator for this

@Majsvaffla
Copy link
Author

You can use the retry(0) decorator for this

I hadn't realized that. However, while that avoids running the job again it doesn't persist the state of failure and won't give me a chance to inspect the failed job, fix the error and possibly trigger it again.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants