What are the consequences of disabling gossip, mingle and heartbeat for celery workers?
Question:
What are the implications of disabling gossip, mingle, and heartbeat on my celery workers?
In order to reduce the number of messages sent to CloudAMQP to stay within the free plan, I decided to follow these recommendations. I therefore used the options --without-gossip --without-mingle --without-heartbeat. Since then, I have been using these options by default for all my celery projects but I am not sure if there are any side-effects I am not aware of.
Please note:
- we now moved to a Redis broker and do not have that much limitations on the number of messages sent to the broker
- we have several instances running multiple celery workers with multiple queues
Answers:
This is the base documentation which doesn’t give us much info
heartbeat
Is related to communication between the worker and the broker (in your case the broker is CloudAMQP).
See explanation
With the --without-heartbeat the worker won’t send heartbeat events
mingle
It only asks for "logical clocks" and "revoked tasks" from other workers on startup.
Taken from whatsnew-3.1
The worker will now attempt to synchronize with other workers in the same cluster.
Synchronized data currently includes revoked tasks and logical clock.
This only happens at startup and causes a one second startup delay to collect broadcast responses from other workers.
You can disable this bootstep using the –without-mingle argument.
Also see docs
gossip
Workers send events to all other workers and this is currently used for "clock synchronization", but it’s also possible to write your own handlers on events, such as on_node_join, See docs
Taken from whatsnew-3.1
Workers are now passively subscribing to worker related events like heartbeats.
This means that a worker knows what other workers are doing and can detect if they go offline. Currently this is only used for clock synchronization, but there are many possibilities for future additions and you can write extensions that take advantage of this already.
Some ideas include consensus protocols, reroute task to best worker (based on resource usage or data locality) or restarting workers when they crash.
We believe that although this is a small addition, it opens amazing possibilities.
You can disable this bootstep using the –without-gossip argument.
Celery workers started up with the --without-mingle option, as @ofirule mentioned above, will not receive synchronization data from other workers, particularly revoked tasks. So if you revoke a task, all workers currently running will receive that broadcast and store it in memory so that when one of them eventually picks up the task from the queue, it will not execute it:
https://docs.celeryproject.org/en/stable/userguide/workers.html#persistent-revokes
But if a new worker starts up before that task has been dequeued by a worker that received the broadcast, it doesn’t know to revoke the task. If it eventually picks up the task, then the task is executed. You will see this behavior if you’re running in an environment where you are dynamically scaling in and out celery workers constantly.
I wanted to know if the --without-heartbeat flag would impact the worker’s ability to detect broker disconnect and attempts to reconnect. The documentation referenced above only opaquely refers to these heartbeats acting at the application layer rather than TCP/IP layer. Ok–what I really want to know is does eliminating these messages affect my worker’s ability to function–specifically to detect broker disconnect and then to try to reconnect appropriately?
I ran a few quick tests myself and found that with the --without-heartbeat flag passed, workers still detect broker disconnect very quickly (initiated by me shutting down the RabbitMQ instance), and they attempt to reconnect to the broker and do so successfully when I restart the RabbitMQ instance. So my basic testing suggests the heartbeats are not necessary for basic health checks and functionality. What’s the point of them anyways? It’s unclear to me, but they don’t appear to have impact on worker functionality.
What are the implications of disabling gossip, mingle, and heartbeat on my celery workers?
In order to reduce the number of messages sent to CloudAMQP to stay within the free plan, I decided to follow these recommendations. I therefore used the options --without-gossip --without-mingle --without-heartbeat. Since then, I have been using these options by default for all my celery projects but I am not sure if there are any side-effects I am not aware of.
Please note:
- we now moved to a Redis broker and do not have that much limitations on the number of messages sent to the broker
- we have several instances running multiple celery workers with multiple queues
This is the base documentation which doesn’t give us much info
heartbeat
Is related to communication between the worker and the broker (in your case the broker is CloudAMQP).
See explanation
With the --without-heartbeat the worker won’t send heartbeat events
mingle
It only asks for "logical clocks" and "revoked tasks" from other workers on startup.
Taken from whatsnew-3.1
The worker will now attempt to synchronize with other workers in the same cluster.
Synchronized data currently includes revoked tasks and logical clock.
This only happens at startup and causes a one second startup delay to collect broadcast responses from other workers.
You can disable this bootstep using the –without-mingle argument.
Also see docs
gossip
Workers send events to all other workers and this is currently used for "clock synchronization", but it’s also possible to write your own handlers on events, such as on_node_join, See docs
Taken from whatsnew-3.1
Workers are now passively subscribing to worker related events like heartbeats.
This means that a worker knows what other workers are doing and can detect if they go offline. Currently this is only used for clock synchronization, but there are many possibilities for future additions and you can write extensions that take advantage of this already.
Some ideas include consensus protocols, reroute task to best worker (based on resource usage or data locality) or restarting workers when they crash.
We believe that although this is a small addition, it opens amazing possibilities.
You can disable this bootstep using the –without-gossip argument.
Celery workers started up with the --without-mingle option, as @ofirule mentioned above, will not receive synchronization data from other workers, particularly revoked tasks. So if you revoke a task, all workers currently running will receive that broadcast and store it in memory so that when one of them eventually picks up the task from the queue, it will not execute it:
https://docs.celeryproject.org/en/stable/userguide/workers.html#persistent-revokes
But if a new worker starts up before that task has been dequeued by a worker that received the broadcast, it doesn’t know to revoke the task. If it eventually picks up the task, then the task is executed. You will see this behavior if you’re running in an environment where you are dynamically scaling in and out celery workers constantly.
I wanted to know if the --without-heartbeat flag would impact the worker’s ability to detect broker disconnect and attempts to reconnect. The documentation referenced above only opaquely refers to these heartbeats acting at the application layer rather than TCP/IP layer. Ok–what I really want to know is does eliminating these messages affect my worker’s ability to function–specifically to detect broker disconnect and then to try to reconnect appropriately?
I ran a few quick tests myself and found that with the --without-heartbeat flag passed, workers still detect broker disconnect very quickly (initiated by me shutting down the RabbitMQ instance), and they attempt to reconnect to the broker and do so successfully when I restart the RabbitMQ instance. So my basic testing suggests the heartbeats are not necessary for basic health checks and functionality. What’s the point of them anyways? It’s unclear to me, but they don’t appear to have impact on worker functionality.