I have docker-compose setup for my Dash application. I need suggestion or preferred way to setup my celery image.
I am using celery for following use-cases and these are cancellable/abortable/revoked task:
Upload file
Model training
Create train, test set
Case-1. Create one service as celery,
command: ["celery", "-A", "tasks", "worker", "--loglevel=INFO", "--pool=prefork", "--concurrency=3", "--statedb=/celery/worker.state"]
So, here we are using default queue, single worker (main) and 3 child/worker processes(ie can execute 3 tasks simultaneously)
Now, if I revoke any task, will it kill the main worker or just that child worker processes executing that task?
Case-2. Create three services as celery-{task_name} ie celery-upload etc,
command: ["celery", "-A", "tasks", "worker", "--loglevel=INFO", "--pool=prefork", "--concurrency=1", , "--statedb=/celery/worker.state", "--queues=upload_queue", , "--hostname=celery_worker_upload_queue"]
So, here we are using custom queue, single worker (main) and 1 child/worker processe(ie can execute 1 task) in its container. This way one service for each task.
Now, if I revoke any task, it will only kill the main worker or just the only child worker processes executing that task in respective container and rest celery containers will be alive?
I tried using below signals with command task.revoke(terminate=True)
SIGKILL and SIGTERM
In this, I observed #worker_process_shutdown.connect and #task_revoked.connect both gets fired.
Does this means main worker and concerned child worker process for whom revoke command is issued(or all child processes as main worker is down) are down?
SIGUSR1
In this, I observed only #task_revoked.connect gets fired.
Does this means main worker is still running/alive and only concerned child worker process for whom revoke command is issued is down?
Which case is preferred?
Is it possible to combine both cases? ie having single celery service with individual workers(main) and individual child worker process and individual queues Or
having single celery service with single worker (main), individual/dedicated child worker processes and individual queues for respective tasks?
One more doubt, As I think, using celery is required for above listed tasks, now say I have button for cleaning a dataframe will this too requires celery?
ie wherever I am dealing with dataframes should I need to use celery?
Please suggest.
UPDATE-2
worker processes = child-worker-process
This is how I am using as below
# Start button
result = background_task_job_one.apply_async(args=(n_clicks,), queue="upload_queue")
# Cancel button
result = result_from_tuple(data, app=celery_app)
result.revoke(terminate=True, signal=signal.SIGUSR1)
# Task
#celery_app.task(bind=True, name="job_one", base=AbortableTask)
def background_task_job_one(self, n_clicks):
msg = "Aborted"
status = False
try:
msg = job(n_clicks) # Long running task
status = True
except SoftTimeLimitExceeded as e:
self.update_state(task_id=self.request.id, state=states.REVOKED)
msg = "Aborted"
status = True
raise Ignore()
finally:
print("FINaLLY")
return status, msg
Is this way ok to handle cancellation of running task? Can you elaborate/explain this line [In practice you should not send signals directly to worker processes.]
Just for clarification from line [In prefork concurrency (the default) you will always have at least two processes running - Celery worker (coordinator) and one or more Celery worker-processes (workers)]
This means
celery -A app worker -P prefork -> 1 main worker and 1 child-worker-process. Is it same as below
celery -A app worker -P prefork -c 1 -> 1 main worker and 1 child-worker-process
Earlier, I tried using class AbortableTask and calling abort(), It was successfully updating the state and status as ABORTED but task was still alive/running.
I read to terminate currently executing task, it is must to pass terminate=True.
This is working, the task stops executing and I need to update task state and status manually to REVOKED, otherwise default PENDING. The only hard-decision to make is to use SIGKILL or SIGTERM or SIGUSR1. I found using SIGUSR1 the main worker process is alive and it revoked only the child worker process executing that task.
Also, luckily I found this link I can setup single celery service with multiple dedicated child-worker-process with its dedicated queues.
Case-3: Celery multi
command: ["celery", "multi", "show", "start", "default", "model", "upload", "-c", "1", "-l", "INFO", "-Q:default", "default_queue", "-Q:model", "model_queue", "-Q:upload", "upload_queue", "-A", "tasks", "-P", "prefork", "-p", "/proj/external/celery/%n.pid", "-f", "/proj/external/celery/%n%I.log", "-S", "/proj/external/celery/worker.state"]
But getting error,
celery service exited code 0
command: bash -c "celery multi start default model upload -c 1 -l INFO -Q:default default_queue -Q:model model_queue -Q:upload upload_queue -A tasks -P prefork -p /proj/external/celery/%n.pid -f /proj/external/celery/%n%I.log -S /proj/external/celery/worker.state"
Here also getting error,
celery | Usage: python -m celery worker [OPTIONS]
celery | Try 'python -m celery worker --help' for help.
celery | Error: No such option: -p
celery | * Child terminated with exit code 2
celery | FAILED
Some doubts, what is preferred 1 worker vs multi worker?
If multi worker with dedicated queues, creating docker service for each task increases the docker-file and services too. So I am trying single celery service with multiple dedicated child-worker-process with its dedicated queues which is easy to abort/revoke/cancel a task.
But getting error with case-3 i.e. celery multi.
Please suggest.
If you revoke a task, it may terminate the working process that was executing the task. The Celery worker will continue working as it needs to coordinate other worker processes. If the life of container is tied to the Celery worker, then container will continue running.
In practice you should not send signals directly to worker processes.
In prefork concurrency (the default) you will always have at least two processes running - Celery worker (coordinator) and one or more Celery worker-processes (workers).
To answer the last question we may need more details. It would be easier if you could run Celery task when all dataframes are available. If that is not the case, then perhaps run individual tasks to process dataframes. It is worth having a look at Celery workflows and see if you can build Chunk-ed workflow. Keep it simple, start with assumption that you have all dataframes available at once, and build from there.
I am using python + flask + SQS and I'm also using celery beat to execute some scheduled tasks.
Recently I went from having one single default "celery" queue to execute all my tasks to having dedicated queues/workers for each task. This includes tasks scheduled by celery beat which now all go to a queue named "scheduler".
Before dropping the "celery" queue, I monitored it to see if any tasks would wind up in that queue. To my surprise, they did.
Since I had no worker consuming from that queue, I could easily inspect the messages which piled up using the AWS console. What is saw was that all tasks were celery.backend_cleanup!!!
I cannot find out from the celery docs how do I prevent this celery.backend_cleanup from getting tossed into this default "celery" queue which I want to get rid of! And the docs on beat do not show an option to pass a queue name. So how do I do this?
This is how I am starting celery beat:
/venv/bin/celery -A backend.app.celery beat -l info --pidfile=
And this is how I am starting the worker
/venv/bin/celery -A backend.app.celery worker -l info -c 2 -Ofair -Q scheduler
Keep in mind, I don't want to stop backend_cleanup from executing, I just want it to go in whatever queue I specify.
Thanks ahead for the assistance!
You can override this in the beat task setup. You could also change the scheduled time to run here if you wanted to.
app.conf.beat_schedule = {
'backend_cleanup': {
'task': 'celery.backend_cleanup',
'options': {'queue': <name>,
'exchange': <name>,
'routing_key': <name>}
}
}
Can I know what does celery daemonization mean? Also, I would like to start running both celery worker and celery beat using single command. Anyway to do it (one way I can think of is using supervisor module for worker and beat and then writing the starting scripts for those in a separate .sh file and running that script..any other way?)
In other terms, I can start the worker and beat process as background process manually even..right? So, daemonization in celery just runs the processes as background processes or is there anything else?
i have two systemd service
one handles my celery workers(10 queue for different tasks) and one handles celery beat
after deploying new code i restart celery worker service to get new tasks and update celery jobs
Should i restart celery beat with celery worker service too?
or it gets new tasks automatically ?
It depends on what type of scheduler you're using.
If it's default PersistentScheduler then yes, you need to restart beat daemon to allow it to pick up new configuration from the beat_schedule setting.
But if you're using something like django-celery-beat which allows managing periodic tasks at runtime then you don't have to restart celery beat.
I'm having issues with a celery beat worker not sending out tasks to celery. Celery runs on three servers with a RabbitMQ cluster behind HAProxy as a backend.
Celery beat is used to schedule a task every day at 9AM. When I start the worker, usually the first task succeeds, but after that it seems like the following tasks are never sent to rabbitmq. In the celery beat log file (celery beat is run with the -l debug option), I see messages such as: Scheduler: Sending due task my-task (tasks.myTask), but no sign of the task being received by any celery worker.
I also tried logging messages in rabbitmq via the rabbitmq_tracing plugin, which only confirmed that the task never reached rabbitmq.
Any idea what could be happening? Thanks!