stopAll() indefinite nbRunning about bottleneck

[SGrondin]

Thank you, this is great, I'll have a look as soon as I can.

[SGrondin]

All queued up and scheduled jobs are always cleared.

For the running jobs, there are 2 settings that matter:

1. interrupt: stopAll() argument
2. rejectOnDrop: argument passed when creating the limiter

• If interrupt is false: The running jobs are ignored. They will complete successfully or fail on their own and the results will be passed to the callers.
• If interrupt is true and rejectOnDrop is true: The running jobs will be rejected immediately with a failed promise. But the job itself keeps running in the background, because it's impossible to cancel function execution in JavaScript. When that job terminates, Bottleneck will ignore the result, since it has already returned a failed promise to the callers.
• If interrupt is true and rejectOnDrop is false: the result of the running jobs will not be passed to the callers once they complete. The callers are simply left hanging.

I'm adding all of that information to the README, I hope it answered your questions.

[chrisblossom]

Thank you for the detailed explanation.

I setup an example repo with all possible combinations of interrupt and rejectOnDrop to show what I am seeing:
https://github.com/chrisblossom/bottleneck-example

I am trying to clear the queue and letting whatever is running finish running as it normally would.

[SGrondin]

Hmm, something sticks out right away: you have the wrong number of arguments in your example.

Here you have 4 arguments and it's clear that you intended for the boolean to be rejectOnDrop's setting.

The arguments are, in order:

• maxConcurrent (default 0)
• minTime (default 0)
• highWater (default -1)
• strategy (default Bottleneck.strategy.LEAK)
• rejectOnDrop (default false)

You can use null instead of undefined to skip an argument (and use the default).

Let me know if that fixes it, and if not I'll look it right away, I just came back from a trip.

[chrisblossom]

Good catch! I just tried it with the correct amount of arguments and the issue is still there.

[SGrondin]

Closing this since it won't be an issue in v2, currently in beta.