-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10.6k
workflows: incorporate user feedback #26871
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
Open
elithrar
wants to merge
2
commits into
production
Choose a base branch
from
update-workflows-docs
base: production
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
+152
−2
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Contributor
|
This pull request requires reviews from CODEOWNERS as it changes files that match the following patterns:
|
Contributor
mia303
approved these changes
Dec 3, 2025
|
|
||
| Instances that are on a `waiting` state - either sleeping, waiting for a retry, or waiting for an event - do **not** count towards concurrency limits. This means that other `queued` instances will be scheduled when an instance goes from a `running` state to a `waiting` one, usually the oldest instance queued, on a best-effort basis. This state transition - `running` to `waiting` - may not occur if the wait duration is too short. | ||
| Instances that are in a `waiting` state — either sleeping via `step.sleep`, waiting for a retry, or waiting for an event via `step.waitForEvent` — do **not** count towards concurrency limits. This means you can have millions of Workflow instances sleeping or waiting for events simultaneously, as only actively `running` instances count toward the 10,000 concurrent instance limit. | ||
|
|
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Suggested change
| However, if there are 10,000 concurrent instances actively running, an instance that has been in a `waiting` state will be queued instead of resuming immediately. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Labels
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Incorporating user feedback on triggering Workflows, limits, the API and general best practices. cc @mmalden @jonesphillip @efalcao for review.
This takes into account the last month of user feedback on Discord.