https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=30654
David Cook <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |[email protected] --- Comment #3 from David Cook <[email protected]> --- I don't know about this one. The database fall-back already doesn't scale, so this would make it so that you could only ever have a maximum of 1 background_jobs_worker.pl for a queue. For this particular use case, wouldn't it be better to enqueue any tasks that weren't enqueued due to RabbitMQ being offline? (To avoid a race condition, you could either have 1 process responsible for that activity, or you could use database locking I suppose. I'd have to double-check the Koha::BackgroundJob code.) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. _______________________________________________ Koha-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-bugs website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
