Repository navigation
Leader-selected collection job IDs #4897
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
tgeoghegan
merged 2 commits into
main
from
timg/leader-selected-collection-job-idempotency-key-server
Oct 20, 2026
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we can still hit this. (Obviously it'll be turned off in prod). That said,
(task_id, query)really is unique in both batch modes now, so perhaps instead of papering over we should just make that tuple unique in the DB?Or we could change this from doing
jobs.nextto doingjobs.find(|job| *job.id() == derived_id)?Either way we don't have to worry about order anymore, or this assertion.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Uniqueness of
(task_id, query)isn't the issue. Consider that in the time interval case, I could have multiple existing collection jobs that intersect with an incoming one. e.g. suppose I have jobs spanning[0, 3), [3, 6), [6, 10)and I make a request spanning[0, 11). All three existing jobs conflict, but a uniqueness constraint wouldn't help us notice that.However I don't object to adding that constraint to the DB since as you say it's an invariant we want to uphold. Let's look at that in #4918