Worker thinks that it is at max capacity when jobBatchMinSize == maxJobsToActivate
See original GitHub issueWhen jobBatchMinSize
is the same number as maxJobsToActivate
, I get the following messages in the logs
11:20:11.050 | zeebe | [test (batch)] INFO: Worker at max capacity - test has 0, a capacity of 5, and a minimum job batch size of 5.
11:20:11.351 | zeebe | [test (batch)] INFO: Worker at max capacity - test has 0, a capacity of 5, and a minimum job batch size of 5.
I believe this is due to the isOverCapacity
check found in https://github.com/camunda-community-hub/zeebe-client-node-js/blob/953a93894406d6e55cdfcc1e6289599644f77831/src/lib/ZBWorkerBase.ts#L378
Expected Behavior
Worker should work on jobs and not be over capacity.
Current Behavior
Worker thinks that it is over capacity.
Possible Solution
Will probably need to have an additional check to see if those 2 values are the same.
Steps to Reproduce
- set
jobBatchMinSize
andmaxJobsToActivate
to be the same value > 0 - run a worker and view log messages saying that it is at max capacity
Context (Environment)
I can’t set the number to be the same for both values. I have to make sure that jobBatchMinSize is less than maxJobsToActivate
Detailed Description
Possible Implementation
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 2 years ago
- Comments:8 (4 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
Would like to handle jobs in batch · Issue #134 - GitHub
Enough jobs are available to the worker to satisfy the minimum job batch size;; The batch has been building for the maximum amount...
Read more >Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start FreeTop Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found
Top GitHub Comments
I don’t make changes to the 0.26 client anymore, so this will have to stay as it is. Thanks for taking a look at it, and I apologise for not picking the version up at the outset!
is someone treating this issue or can I take it?