feat(fleet): add control loop and state management #3116
Conversation
packages/fleet/lib/supervisor.ts
Outdated
| import { setTimeout } from 'node:timers/promises'; | ||
| import type { NodeProvider } from './node-providers/node_provider.js'; | ||
|
|
||
| type Action = |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I know Action is an overloaded term in Nango but I couldn't think of a better name. Suggestions are welcomed
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Operation is more accurate I feel, but still very generic
There was a problem hiding this comment.
good idea. changing for operation
packages/fleet/lib/supervisor.ts
Outdated
| STARTING: 5 * 60 * 1000, | ||
| FINISHING: 24 * 60 * 60 * 1000, | ||
| TERMINATED: 7 * 24 * 60 * 60 * 1000, | ||
| ERROR: 7 * 24 * 60 * 60 * 1000 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
arbitrary values. Happy to change
packages/fleet/lib/supervisor.ts
Outdated
| import { setTimeout } from 'node:timers/promises'; | ||
| import type { NodeProvider } from './node-providers/node_provider.js'; | ||
|
|
||
| type Action = |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Operation is more accurate I feel, but still very generic
| expect(failedNode.state).toBe('ERROR'); | ||
| expect(failedNode.error).toBe('my error'); | ||
| }); | ||
| it('should be able to register a node', async () => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure what you have against line break 🤣
There was a problem hiding this comment.
do you mean empty line between the tests? :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes even in general, between logical code blocks but I guess it's keyboard-driven development :p
TBonnin
force-pushed
the
tbonnin/nan-2301/fleet-control-loop
branch
from
e5cd89c to
82cb468
Compare
TBonnin
force-pushed
the
tbonnin/nan-2301/fleet-init-models
branch
from
544a1c3 to
0a2ded7
Compare
TBonnin
force-pushed
the
tbonnin/nan-2301/fleet-control-loop
branch
from
82cb468 to
353f8f3
Compare
Ex: in case of error, a new node with same routingId/deploymentId will be created in case of runner idled because of inactivity, a new node with same routingId/deploymentId will be created
- Implement Supervisor class to manage node states and transitions - Add methods to start, fail, outdate, terminate, and remove nodes - Introduce NodeProvider interface for node operations - Update node state transitions and error handling - Add integration tests for Supervisor functionality
TBonnin
force-pushed
the
tbonnin/nan-2301/fleet-control-loop
branch
from
353f8f3 to
868255c
Compare
| this.state = 'stopped'; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| private async plan(cursor?: number): Promise<Result<Operation[]>> { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would it be easier going forward for operations to be an object with a type and a function attached, and then executing the plan just loops and calls the functions?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
why not. The advantage of having values instead of opaque functions is that you can optimize the plan before to execute it. I don't think Render API can do it and even if it does I am not planning to support it but we could for instance takes all the CREATE operations fromthe plan and combine them in a unique call to the node provider instead of one by one.
What's not yet implemented:
There are still a few TODOs that I will address in following PRs
How to test
Still not wired. You can run the tests ;)