Fixes Internal Server Error returned on simultaneous SignalWithStart requests for the same WF ID #719
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
samarabbas
reviewed
Sep 10, 2020
samarabbas
approved these changes
Sep 10, 2020
Contributor
samarabbas
left a comment
samarabbas
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
One minor comment. Looks good otherwise.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR fixes a bug where simultaneous SignalWithStart requests for the same WorkflowID randomly results in one of them failing with a "Workflow Execution Already Started Error." This error does not make sense given that SignalWithStart is supposed to seamlessly handle both the case where the WF is already running and the case where it needs to be created.
Our throughput stress scenario easily reproduces this issue in the one box environment. The issue stopped reproducing once this change was integrated.
This is a relatively low-risk change. We only retry under certain error conditions that we expect to be transient, and in the worst case, we keep retrying until the request times out.