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

Revisit default lifecycle phases and timeouts (e.g. for ThreadPoolTaskScheduler) #32152

Closed
jhoeller opened this issue Jan 29, 2024 · 1 comment
Assignees
Labels
in: core Issues in core modules (aop, beans, core, context, expression) type: enhancement A general enhancement
Milestone

Comments

@jhoeller
Copy link
Contributor

A recent case in Spring Integration and scenarios as shown in #32109 suggest that we should revisit our default lifecycle phases: currently Integer.MAX_VALUE for ThreadPoolTaskScheduler which leads to it being in the first round of stopping, not giving other tasks room for a custom phase earlier than that without tweaking the scheduler's own phase definition. Also, the default timeout for a lifecycle phase is 30 seconds which seems long (in particular in common cloud deployment arrangements) if you may actually plan to run into this in certain scenarios.

@jhoeller jhoeller added in: core Issues in core modules (aop, beans, core, context, expression) type: enhancement A general enhancement labels Jan 29, 2024
@jhoeller jhoeller added this to the 6.2.x milestone Jan 29, 2024
@jhoeller jhoeller self-assigned this Jan 29, 2024
@jhoeller jhoeller modified the milestones: 6.2.x, 6.2.0-M1 Feb 5, 2024
@jhoeller
Copy link
Contributor Author

ThreadPoolTaskScheduler and co use a default phase of Integer.MAX_VALUE / 2, aligned with Spring Integration.
The default timeout for a lifecycle phase is 10 seconds now.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
in: core Issues in core modules (aop, beans, core, context, expression) type: enhancement A general enhancement
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant