1stSolo

1stSolo

I have a legacy code that I’m refactoring into executing asynchronously. The easiest would be to start a Task from DynamicSupervisor. But I don’t know how to handle task termination/completion.

  • Don’t need to restart failed tasks, so :temporary mode for supervisor suits me.
  • For normal completion of the task, need to send a message via PubSub
  • For abnormal termination of the task, need to send a message via PubSub and possibly do some cleanup.

I suppose for normal death I can trigger PubSub in the function that calls legacy process and is passed into Task. But abnormal must be caught somehow…

Is DynamicSupervisor suitable for that? How do I catch task’s :DOWN message for whatever reason - normal or abnormal termination?

Showing Posts 1 to 8

mpope

mpope

IIRC tasks are linked to the calling process

When invoked, a new process will be created, linked and monitored by the caller. Once the task action finishes, a message will be sent to the caller with the result.

The calling process will need to trap exits, handle the task’s abnormal termination, and then perform the cleanup. This is described here, but what that really means is you just need a handle_info to capture the exit message.

zachallaun

zachallaun

I’d additionally recommend using a Task.Supervisor.

iex(1)> Supervisor.start_link([{Task.Supervisor, name: MyTaskSupervisor}], strategy: :one_for_one)
{:ok, #PID<0.114.0>}

iex(2)> Task.Supervisor.async_nolink(MyTaskSupervisor, fn -> :awesome_task end)
%Task{
  mfa: {:erlang, :apply, 2},
  owner: #PID<0.112.0>,
  pid: #PID<0.117.0>,
  ref: #Reference<0.987707504.2573795360.120005>
}

iex(3)> flush()
{#Reference<0.987707504.2573795360.120005>, :awesome_task},
 {:DOWN, #Reference<0.987707504.2573795360.120005>, :process, #PID<0.117.0>, :normal}

iex(4)> Task.Supervisor.async_nolink(MyTaskSupervisor, fn -> raise "uh oh" end)
%Task{
  mfa: {:erlang, :apply, 2},
  owner: #PID<0.112.0>,
  pid: #PID<0.120.0>,
  ref: #Reference<0.987707504.2573795360.120046>
}

iex(5)> flush()
{:DOWN, #Reference<0.987707504.2573795360.120178>, :process, #PID<0.129.0>,
 {%RuntimeError{message: "uh oh"}, ...}}

Docs for async_nolink/3 have some more information on this. Basically, if the task succeeds, you’ll receive a {task_ref, result} message. Regardless of success of failure, you’ll receive a {:DOWN, ref, :process, pid, reason} message. If it was a normal exit, that reason will be :normal. Otherwise, it was abnormal.

Your process kicking off these tasks can implement handle_info and pattern-match on these to broadcast the appropriate PubSub message.

1stSolo

1stSolo OP

The calling process is the thread that handles graphql query. Since the Task starts asynchronously that thread will probably terminate before the task is completed normally. Also I heard trap_exists is unreliable in case of abnormal termination. And handle_info is a callback in a GenServer. So if you’re not in a GenServer, I was hoping there must be a way to provide a callback to handle task death - I would think that’s task supervisor’s job.

But I guess I’ll need to use GenServer to create a Monitor for my tasks that implements handle_info callback, start it statically in Application supervisor tree, and it will sit there idly until I call some monitor(pid) function so it can call Process.monitor(pid) which would then guarantee I get notification via handle_info() regardless of how the task died.

I just thought that the simplest way to achieve asynchronous things is by using DynamicSupervisor and Task, but they seem to be too limited in their functionality out of the box.

zachallaun

zachallaun

Perhaps you’re used to something like promises that have a success/error callback. That’s just not how the BEAM works, though – the primitives and assumptions are different.

Consider that you could pass a function to the supervisor to run on success/failure of a task. When the supervisor calls your function, what happens if it crashes? It takes down the whole supervisor.

All of these components have been very carefully designed and tested for robustness. Sometimes things seem tricky because there’s a gap in some API or some ergonomics to be improved, but I don’t think that’s the case here.

lud

lud

Since the Task starts asynchronously that thread will probably terminate before the task is completed normally

If there is a high chance that the task will fail and there is no process to receive the DOWN message, why not just try/catch directly in the task process and publish your message accordingly?

1stSolo

1stSolo OP

Because

  1. Elixir’s MOD is “let if fail”, instead of coding paranoid catching of all possible exception like in Java
  2. A task can be killed by other means and one still needs to handle it gracefully (perform cleanups, pubsub events etc)
    So I followed @mpope’s recommendation and built a GenServer that monitors task execution and handles its death in handle_info({:DOWN, ... and normal return in handle_info({_, result}... . The GenServer is started in application’s supervisor tree and then when the task is started I register it using MyMonitor.monitor(task) which delegates to Process.monitor(task.pid) - to make sure the calling process - in this case, my GenServer/Monitor - gets its handle_info called.
    I wish there was an easier way out of the box but c’est la vie.
zachallaun

zachallaun

Here’s what I came up with as an exercise. Some small liberties taken based on how I set up Phoenix.PubSub, but hopefully still understandable.

defmodule MyApp.TaskManager do
  use GenServer
  
  @pubsub_topic "really_important_tasks"

  @doc """
  Starts a singleton task manager.
  """
  def start_link(arg) do
    GenServer.start_link(__MODULE__, arg, name: __MODULE__)
  end

  @doc """
  Starts an async task and broadcasts the result or failure.
  """
  def async_task(id, fun) do
    GenServer.cast(__MODULE__, {:async_task, id, fun})
  end
  
  @impl true
  def init(opts) do
    {:ok, %{supervisor: Keyword.fetch!(opts, :supervisor), tasks: %{}}}
  end
  
  @impl true
  def handle_cast({:async_task, id, fun}, %{supervisor: supervisor, tasks: tasks} = state) do
    %Task{ref: ref} = Task.Supervisor.async_nolink(supervisor, fun)
    {:noreply, %{state | tasks: Map.put(tasks, ref, id)}}
  end
  
  @impl true
  def handle_info({ref, result}, state) when is_reference(ref) do
    {:noreply, broadcast_result(state, ref, {:ok, result})}
  end
  
  def handle_info({:DOWN, _ref, :process, _pid, :normal}, state) do
    {:noreply, state}
  end
  
  def handle_info({:DOWN, ref, :process, _pid, reason}, %{tasks: tasks} = state) do
    {:noreply, broadcast_result(state, ref, {:error, reason})}
  end
  
  defp broadcast_result(%{tasks: tasks} = state, ref, result) do
    if id = tasks[ref] do
      MyApp.PubSub.broadcast(@pubsub_topic, {:task, id, result})
    end
    
    %{state | tasks: Map.delete(tasks, ref)}
  end
end

# when starting your application
children = [
  MyApp.PubSub,
  {Task.Supervisor, name: MyApp.TaskSupervisor},
  {MyApp.TaskManager, supervisor: MyApp.TaskSupervisor}
]

Supervisor.start_link(children, strategy: :one_for_one)

# to start tasks
MyApp.TaskManager.async_task("some_important_thing", &do_the_thing/0)

# if you care about results
MyApp.PubSub.subscribe("really_important_tasks:*")

(Having written this out, I think it’s pretty well worth the ~50 lines of code to have control over and insight into task execution.)

1stSolo

1stSolo OP

Yeah that’s pretty much what I got, except I used pid instead of ref and I have case reason instead of functions with different pattern matches. Thanks!

— All posts loaded —

Where Next? Top

Trending in Questions Top

RSP87
I’m working on a project that simulates the bumbl example in the programming phoenix book. It acts almost like an email client. We have a...
New
kpanic
Hi everyone, I am toying with the idea of building a “match maker” for giving personal help to people that wants to start coding. I sta...
New
nseaSeb
Hello, I know there is an approach for handling lists that allows for optimized traversal, but I can’t recall the specific method (somet...
New
brecabral
Documentation While reading the Scoped Routes section, I noticed that the documentation currently refers to a problem without explainin...
New
velrest
So my question is quite simple and i have found no conclusive answer on forum, google or AI. Should we use :erlang.float for Integer to ...
New
asweet-confluent
I recently noticed that Elixir’s Logger defaults its primary log level to :debug when no :logger, :level application configuration is pre...
New
apz
I’m new to elixir and just tried to install the elixirLS extension for VScode(ium) and it is throwing some errors that I would like help ...
New

Other Trending Topics Top

JesseHerrick
Hey, I’m Jesse and I’m the main contributor behind Dexter, a full-featured, lightning-fast Elixir LSP optimized for large codebases. It s...
New
mudasobwa
I am happy to introduce the very α version of the new programming language compiled to BEAM. Welcome Cure. It has literally three kille...
New
marciok
Hi there! We created Gust: A task orchestrator inspired by Airflow. For those who have never heard about Aiflow, it’s a Python-based wor...
New
mhanberg
Hi everyone! The first release candidate for the Expert language server project is now available! We’ve published a press release detai...
New
jimsynz
Beam Bots (or just BB for short) is a framework for building fault-tolerant robotics applications in Elixir using familiar OTP patterns. ...
New
Dmk
Xamal is a deployment tool for Elixir apps that deploys native releases to bare metal servers over SSH. It’s a port of GitHub - basecamp/...
New

We're in Beta

About us Mission Statement

Options

Thread Display Mode




Thread Preview

Skip Thread Previews