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

Trigger not fires in v.3.0.7 #741

Closed
marcilioware opened this issue Mar 24, 2019 · 8 comments
Closed

Trigger not fires in v.3.0.7 #741

marcilioware opened this issue Mar 24, 2019 · 8 comments

Comments

@marcilioware
Copy link

Version: 3.0.7

Expected behavior

Trigger fires in the scheduled time.

Actual behavior

Trigger not fires so I have to restart quartz service.

Steps to reproduce

After start the service and create all jobs and triggers, the service works for a while and then, even with the service running, triggers stop to fires.
I just upgrade to version 3.0.7.

@ryanlin1986
Copy link

Me too, just dont' work after running for a while( may be days), don't get a clue.

@flemmingdjensen
Copy link

Same behavior here.... Having 18 jobs configured - suddenly random jobs stops runnning firing....

Have to PauseAll() and ResumeAll() using quartzMin (Web interface)

@mbtx2
Copy link

mbtx2 commented Jul 18, 2019

Same behavior here. Also 3.0.7. Quartz runs fine for days, even weeks and then stops. In the debug logs, there are no errors at all, and no warnings that aren't normal. It goes from normal operation to "2019-07-18 09:13:58,728 [7] DEBUG Quartz.Core.QuartzSchedulerThread [(null)] - Batch acquisition of 0 triggers".

This is a production-affecting problem. I'm not sure how to troubleshoot it, but am willing to try whatever suggestions people might have. We've used Quartz for many years and become confident in its stability, and it very well may be something in our code.

Is there a way I can have a some code look for this occurrence of "Batch acquisition of 0 triggers"?

@shahjeet297
Copy link

We have faced the same problem and after investing we have observe that there are jobs which took around 32 seconds and other jobs are taking around 4-5 seconds. There is nothing else which suspecting the cause. We have used the ADO connection delegate with thread count as 50 in clustered environment where two instances are running.

@lahma
Copy link
Member

lahma commented Nov 6, 2019

This might be related to this issue quartz-scheduler/quartz#145 . Probably need to check and port the changes from there if they see, to relate to this issue your are facing.

@RavindraV07
Copy link

RavindraV07 commented Dec 5, 2019

Hi ,

I am scheduling and providing the MySQL connection but I am getting Trigger _Satate ERROR.

Here is my config.

var NameValueCollection = new NameValueCollection();
NameValueCollection.Add("quartz.scheduler.instanceName", "HomRoverScheduler");
NameValueCollection.Add("quartz.scheduler.instanceId", "Instance_HomRoverScheduler");
NameValueCollection.Add("quartz.jobStore.type", "Quartz.Impl.AdoJobStore.JobStoreTX, Quartz");
NameValueCollection.Add("quartz.jobStore.useProperties", "false");
NameValueCollection.Add("quartz.jobStore.dataSource", "Homebuy");
NameValueCollection.Add("quartz.jobStore.tablePrefix", "QRTZ_");
NameValueCollection.Add("quartz.dataSource.Homebuy.provider", "MySql");
NameValueCollection.Add("quartz.dataSource.Homebuy.connectionString", "server=....;database=...;user=...;pwd=...;TreatTinyAsBoolean=false");
NameValueCollection.Add("quartz.threadPool.threadCount", "50");
NameValueCollection.Add("quartz.threadPool.threadPriority", "10");
NameValueCollection.Add("quartz.serializer.type", "json");

        return NameValueCollection;

@harveynguyen
Copy link

Hi guys,
any updates on this issue ?

@lahma
Copy link
Member

lahma commented Jul 9, 2020

You should try if Quartz 3.1 beta 1 will fix this issue. We can reopen if issue still persists.

@lahma lahma closed this as completed Jul 9, 2020
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

No branches or pull requests

8 participants