https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=29507
--- Comment #24 from David Cook <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Nick Clemens (kidclamp) from comment #23) > (In reply to Jonathan Druart from comment #22) > > Why didn't we enqueue several background jobs instead? > > > > Isn't the point of the workers to deal with parallelization and > > configuration of how to process jobs? > > I think we didn't have as much progress on the background jobs when I > started this. Would it be the goal now to have most cronjobs submit > background jobs? I see pros and cons with both approaches I think. If we did enqueue them as background jobs and there were a large number of jobs across multiple Koha instances, that would produce a higher load on the server than doing the work in the cronjob itself. While parallel processing in the cronjob would produce a higher load as well, it would still be smaller than the load using background jobs (although the impact will vary depending on the number of instances per system and the amount of resources available) But... we'd get through the cronjobs faster. (We have found the cronjobs can take a very long time to finish, because each cronjob has to run for each library one by one.) I'm intrigued by both approaches... -- 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/
