Skip to content

Reproduce backfiller starvation above shared capacity - #51

Open
chaptersix wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
scheduler-backfill-capacity/evidence
Open

chaptersix wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
scheduler-backfill-capacity/evidence

Conversation

@chaptersix

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

At default limits, 451 or more concurrent range backfillers divide positive shared capacity down to zero and all stall indefinitely. Adds a deterministic component-engine counterexample and a passing 450-range native control, with repeated draining and request-identity/budget assertions.

Evidence: report and sequence diagram, scrubbed failure image. Known failures require TEMPORAL_RUN_MIGRATION_COUNTEREXAMPLES=1.

Validation: native control passes; 451/1000 counterexamples fail as expected. The following fix layer passes scheduler package tests, V1 scheduler/replay tests, and make lint-code-fast. No matching upstream capacity fix found in the public open-PR audit.

@chaptersix
chaptersix marked this pull request as ready for review September 5, 2026 02:09
@chatgpt-codex-connector

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Sep 5, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review Status Commit Review trigger
📝 Code Review Completed 2026-09-05T02:13:33.034178Z 13bf411 Draft marked ready
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 13bf411727

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

if remaining == 0 {
break
}
require.Positive(t, buffered, "seed=capacity-%d: empty buffer and %d ranges must make progress", count, remaining)

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

P1 Badge Fire the initial backfiller tasks before asserting progress

On the first loop iteration, both preceding updateScheduler calls only commit component mutations; they do not execute the immediate pure tasks created by NewRangeBackfiller. Consequently buffered is still zero and remaining is still count, so this assertion fails even for the always-enabled 450-range control. The first FirePureTasks call is below the assertion and is therefore unreachable; fire the initial tasks before the first drain/check.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

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.

1 participant