You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The recent-ish changes to workers now recommend to set a unique worker_name per worker process. This makes scaling the number of workers quite a bit more complex than previously since now every instance needs a tailor made config file.
This is especially annoying when using things like docker-compose, swarm or kubernetes where spinning up multiple (identical) instances of a service is a built-in feature.
I have no concrete proposal on how to solve the problem(s) the worker name solves though. (AFAICS they're only really necessary for reverse mapping for federation senders and stream writers?)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
This issue has been migrated from #8084.
Description:
The recent-ish changes to workers now recommend to set a unique
worker_name
per worker process. This makes scaling the number of workers quite a bit more complex than previously since now every instance needs a tailor made config file.This is especially annoying when using things like docker-compose, swarm or kubernetes where spinning up multiple (identical) instances of a service is a built-in feature.
I have no concrete proposal on how to solve the problem(s) the worker name solves though. (AFAICS they're only really necessary for reverse mapping for federation senders and stream writers?)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: