IntenseWebs/discourse
3
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/discourse/discourse.git synced 2025-02-16 18:24:52 -06:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Instead of a Distributed Mutex, use a Redis SETNX guard

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Robin Ward 2016-04-12 14:47:38 -04:00
parent fd2b8dd12f
commit f4672a9e05
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG Key ID: 0E091E2B4ED1B83D
1 changed files with 11 additions and 3 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

14
app/jobs/onceoff.rb
View File

@ -5,18 +5,26 @@ class Jobs::Onceoff < Jobs::Base
klass.name.sub(/^Jobs\:\:/, '')
end
def running_key_name
"#{self.class.name}:running"
end
# Pass `force: true` to force it happen again
def execute(args)
job_name = self.class.name_for(self.class)
has_lock = $redis.setnx(running_key_name, Time.now.to_i)
if args[:force] || !OnceoffLog.where(job_name: job_name).exists?
return if $redis.exists(self.class.name)
DistributedMutex.synchronize(self.class.name) do
# If we can't get a lock, just noop
if args[:force] || has_lock
begin
return if OnceoffLog.where(job_name: job_name).exists? && !args[:force]
execute_onceoff(args)
OnceoffLog.create(job_name: job_name)
ensure
$redis.del(running_key_name) if has_lock
end
end
end
def self.enqueue_all