fix(gateway): send on closed chan - (*Handle).webRequestQ

[Sidddddarth]

Description

Using a waitGroup to wait on all in flight requests before closing gateway workers' webRequestQ.
It is an anti-pattern to close a channel if there's multiple concurrent senders. So we make sure there's no more senders using a simple waitgroup(inFlightRequests). A middleware that adds and Dones this waitgroup is then needed.

Eventually during Shutdown we wait on this waitgroup before closing the workers' webRequestQ channels. All the requests would have been handled by this point.

Linear Ticket

Resolves PIPE-1072

Security

• The code changed/added as part of this pull request won't create any security issues with how the software is being used.

[coderabbitai]

Important

Review skipped

Auto reviews are disabled on this repository.

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

---

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
  • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Additionally, you can add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.

CodeRabbit Configration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
• If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 74.35%. Comparing base (5ceb1d4) to head (c8f99f7).
Report is 1 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #4709      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   74.37%   74.35%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         427      427              
  Lines       49610    49614       +4     
==========================================
- Hits        36895    36890       -5     
- Misses      10274    10282       +8     
- Partials     2441     2442       +1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[lvrach]

If you wait for server.Shutdown to return normally all the open connections will have been completed. Why this approach is not enough and we have to introduce this counter?

[Sidddddarth]

If you wait for server.Shutdown to return normally all the open connections will have been completed.

True.

Why this approach is not enough and we have to introduce this counter?

server.Shutdown and close(webRequestQ) happens in two different goroutines. This counter is a way to synchronise both. Also note that server.Shutdown is a graceful exit, calling it will immediately lead to ListenAndServe to return ErrServerClosed.
From the documentation:

When Shutdown is called, [Serve], [ListenAndServe], and [ListenAndServeTLS] immediately return [ErrServerClosed].
Make sure the program doesn't exit and waits instead for Shutdown to return.

The synchronisation introduced in this PR does the second part - waiting for shutdown to return and not exiting already.

[lvrach]

The synchronisation introduced in this PR does the second part - waiting for shutdown to return and not exiting already.

That's my point. We can do this by waiting on shutdown to complete, rather than introducing a counter.

[Sidddddarth]

the gracefulFunc in kithhtputil can return an error other than one on server.Shutdown too, which prompted me to go with a counter.

func ListenAndServe(ctx context.Context, server *http.Server, shutdownTimeout ...time.Duration) error {
	return gracefulFunc(ctx, server, server.ListenAndServe, shutdownTimeout...)
}


func gracefulFunc(ctx context.Context, server *http.Server, fn func() error, shutdownTimeout ...time.Duration) error {
	errCh := make(chan error, 1)
	go func() {
		errCh <- fn()
	}()
	select {
	case err := <-errCh:
		return err
	case <-ctx.Done():
		switch {
		case len(shutdownTimeout) == 0:
			return server.Shutdown(context.Background())
		case shutdownTimeout[0] == 0:
			return server.Close()
		default:
			ctx, cancel := context.WithTimeout(context.Background(), shutdownTimeout[0])
			defer cancel()

			return server.Shutdown(ctx)
		}
	}
}

[fracasula]

@lvrach I think we should determine the behaviour we want first.

Upon cancellation we could:

1. wait for all the in-flight requests to be done and try to persist them. the risk is that they might not be done before the graceful shutdown period so we could end up shutting down ungracefully.
   • this could be done with a simple WaitGroup added in a middleware like @Sidddddarth is doing and then we Wait() on Shutdown.
2. don't wait for all the in-flight requests to persist. we can discard the data and return 503 Unavailable. we'll always be sure that we can gracefully return.
   • we could use a common context for the workers and use it in a select when adding to the channels, if the context is done then propagate that info and return 503 and then terminate the worker asap.

[ktgowtham]

I'm assuming this is not a SIGTERM exit, but for some reason server.ListenAndServe is being errored out. We probably need to know the reason for it first. logs didn't help me. based on my assumption, server.Shutdown(context.Background()) isn't being executed for sure. wdyt?

func ListenAndServe(ctx context.Context, server *http.Server, shutdownTimeout ...time.Duration) error { return gracefulFunc(ctx, server, server.ListenAndServe, shutdownTimeout...) }

[github-actions]

This PR is considered to be stale. It has been open 20 days with no further activity thus it is going to be closed in 7 days. To avoid such a case please consider removing the stale label manually or add a comment to the PR.

[fracasula]

Let's see how it goes with this approach. Worst case we get killed after the grace period because some in-flight request is being slow, and that would still be better than a panic so 👍