Skip to content

fix(sdk): always re-evaluate termination after checkpoint queue drains#526

Draft
ayushiahjolia wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
map_callback_bug
Draft

fix(sdk): always re-evaluate termination after checkpoint queue drains#526
ayushiahjolia wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
map_callback_bug

Conversation

@ayushiahjolia
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Issue #, if available: #510

Description of changes:
Removes the if (!this.terminationTimer) guard in processQueue's finally block so that termination is always re-evaluated after the checkpoint queue drains.

Problem

In map + waitForCallback scenarios, callbacks register as IDLE_AWAITED and set terminationTimer before a completed branch's fire-and-forget checkpoint enters the queue. When the queue drains, the guard sees terminationTimer is
non-null and skips checkAndTerminate. The function never suspends - it wedges until an unrelated timer (e.g., a sibling ctx.wait) fires.

Fix

Replace the conditional with an unconditional this.checkAndTerminate().
This is safe because scheduleTermination already returns early when the same reason is already scheduled — no timer restart, no extra cooldown in the common case.

Testing

  • Added unit tests that fail without the fix and pass with it
  • Added map + waitForCallback and map + waitForCondition example tests
  • All existing tests pass

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@ParidelPooya ParidelPooya left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I ran new added examples and integration test with and without the fix (change to checkpoint-manager), ignoring assertEventSignatures, integration test are passing before and after the change.

That means that we didn't manage to reproduce the customer issue.

@ayushiahjolia ayushiahjolia marked this pull request as draft June 2, 2026 17:26
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants