Bull: Missing process handler for job type __default__

Created on 31 Oct 2019  Â·  5Comments  Â·  Source: OptimalBits/bull

Description

We are getting a 'failed' and 'error' event with the following message: Missing process handler for job type __default__

Minimal, Working Test code to reproduce the issue.

(An easy to reproduce test case will dramatically decrease the resolution time.)

We do not know where it is coming among all the jobs running in our system

Bull version

3.10.0

Additional information

Most helpful comment

Hi! Looks like you use named processors, i.e. when you define processing callback with name like

queue.process('some-name', async (job) => {  })

and then add jobs as usual without setting that some-name, so bull uses __default__ as default:

queue.add({ "input": "data" }, ... opts);

So either define process callback without setting name (1st arg) or only add jobs to queue to match one of names you use. Finally you can always add named processor for __default__ as well —

queue.process('__default__', async (job) => {  })

All 5 comments

Hi! Looks like you use named processors, i.e. when you define processing callback with name like

queue.process('some-name', async (job) => {  })

and then add jobs as usual without setting that some-name, so bull uses __default__ as default:

queue.add({ "input": "data" }, ... opts);

So either define process callback without setting name (1st arg) or only add jobs to queue to match one of names you use. Finally you can always add named processor for __default__ as well —

queue.process('__default__', async (job) => {  })

Thanks for this @stansv

Trying to find if we ever define this un-named job. As of now, cannot find any. Still looking...

We cannot find any job with an "un-named" parameters.

But we tried creating a processor for __default__ but we are still getting the errors

Related issues:

1500

1479

1377

1334

1222

I also see this issue in production from time to time. We also give all jobs names.

The named processors feature has been just a root of confusion, thats why this has been removed from BullMQ (aka bull 4).

Was this page helpful?
0 / 5 - 0 ratings

Related issues

rodrigoords picture rodrigoords  Â·  4Comments

weeco picture weeco  Â·  3Comments

chocof picture chocof  Â·  3Comments

pigaov10 picture pigaov10  Â·  3Comments

sarneeh picture sarneeh  Â·  3Comments