Skip to content
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

Scheduling behaviour for multi-instance apps #174

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

bryophyta
Copy link
Contributor

@bryophyta bryophyta commented Jul 12, 2024

What is being recommended?

Leveraging an app's load balancer to schedule tasks with side-effects on multi-instance apps.

What's the context?

This is a problem that my team and I have come across a few times, and describes a solution that we've found to work well in production a few times.

I presented on this approach at Server Side Meetup a couple of months ago and it was generally well-received, and I've incorporated some extra considerations that were raised in discussion into this recommendation.

@bryophyta bryophyta changed the title Recommendations for multi-instance apps Scheduling behaviour for multi-instance apps Jul 12, 2024
@bryophyta bryophyta force-pushed the pf/eventbridge-asg-scheduling branch 2 times, most recently from ef22888 to d678b57 Compare July 12, 2024 15:10
@mchv mchv force-pushed the pf/eventbridge-asg-scheduling branch from d678b57 to f4374b6 Compare July 19, 2024 08:48
@mchv
Copy link
Member

mchv commented Jul 19, 2024

This looks like a great addition to me on a very practical problem, and this has already has been presented to a wider audience. It would be great to have someone from another team who have use this pattern to quickly review before we merge?

@mchv mchv self-requested a review July 19, 2024 08:53
@bryophyta
Copy link
Contributor Author

It would be great to have someone from another team who have use this pattern to quickly review before we merge?

Thanks for this suggestion. I'm not sure whether other teams are currently using this pattern..

The EventBridge Rule + ApiDestination pattern is being used in the fastly-content-fanout project. From discussion with @twrichards (currently on leave) I believe that they saw a very similar set of pros and cons when using this pattern, although the use-case was slightly different (scheduling calls to a 3rd party service, hence not so concerned with the multi-instance app issue as such).

But if we'd like to see multiple teams using a solution before adding it to this repo then I can pause this PR for now?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants