Currently on mobile, so I can add more info when I am in front of a computer. I make heavy use of ChromicPDF in eaglemms.com so that customers can generate invoices. I think I used to have issues similar to what you are describing so I put poolboy in front of ChromicPDF and haven’t had any issues. I also do something similar to what you are describing where a controller generates the PDF on demand versus generating and storing it in S3 or something and poolboy+ChromicPDF has no problem keeping up (at least for my current customer load).

Using a dedicated pooler is a great option.

As an alternative for others in the future, there is a blocking option in Oban called Relay, like a transparently distributed task with concurrency limits (Pro only though).

Hi, author of ChromicPDF here.

I’m currently scratching my head a bit as the accepted solution in this thread does not make sense to me (putting a worker pool in front of a worker pool), yet two people independently report good experience with it - I wonder if this points to an obscure bug in Chromic, or merely to an opportunity to improve its documentation.

@axelclark Let me first address your original post. I believe the docs you cited led to some confusion, rather than being helpful. Especially this line:

Please note that this is a non-queueing session pool.

This is definitely misleading. I should have written that it is not a persistently queueing session pool. The NimblePool library used in Chromic’s SessionPool does in fact queue “worker checkout” commands (by virtue of OTP message boxes & genserver). But its queue isn’t persistent, as in, if you overwhelm your system, worker checkouts will timeout and requests will be dropped; which leads to the exception you have posted. That’s also perfectly fine depending on your use-case, if you expect only few concurrent requests, or if you’re fine with the occassional failure when you exceed the pool concurrency, there’s nothing you need to do about it at all .

In other words, what I meant to say in the docs is this: If you expect peaks in concurrent demand (= greater than max throughput of your system) and you are required to handle them gracefully, you must begin to write requests down for later and asynchronously process them (e.g. with a job queue like Oban, backed by a database table, and so on). This is actually not specific to ChromicPDF in any way, just generally job processing. And vice versa, if your scenario does not have peaks or you don’t care about them, that’s 100% cool, too, and you don’t need any of this.

I probably should just ditch that statement fromt the docs.

Now, with regards to putting poolboy in front of it: I’m honestly curious how that would change anything in your test setup? You should now get a poolboy exception instead of ChromicPDF’s when you overwhelm your system. Even the default checkout timeout (think, “max queue wait time”) is the same, I believe, at 5 seconds. Question goes to @akoutmos , too, of course.

Fun fact: ChromicPDF used to depend on poolboy before v0.6.0. Which is when I realized that a process pool in front of a single connection process is pointless. NimblePool eliminates the worker processes and only pools “resources”.