Skip to content

fix(router): skip plan cache OnEvict during graphMux shutdown#3009

Closed
arutkowski00 wants to merge 1 commit into
wundergraph:mainfrom
mondaycom:adamru/upstream-bugfix-plan-cache-on-evict-guard
Closed

fix(router): skip plan cache OnEvict during graphMux shutdown#3009
arutkowski00 wants to merge 1 commit into
wundergraph:mainfrom
mondaycom:adamru/upstream-bugfix-plan-cache-on-evict-guard

Conversation

@arutkowski00

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Problem

planCache.Close() invokes OnEvict for every entry, migrating them into slowplancache immediately before both caches are torn down during mux shutdown.

Fix

Disable OnEvict during intentional mux shutdown and wait for pending slow-cache writes before closing plan caches.

Test plan

  • go test ./router/core/...

Part of config hot-reload memory leak investigation (monday.com #3221).

Ristretto Close() clears all plan cache entries and fires OnEvict for
each one, migrating them into slowplancache right before both caches
are torn down. Disable OnEvict during intentional mux shutdown and wait
for pending slow-cache writes first.
@arutkowski00 arutkowski00 requested a review from a team as a code owner June 24, 2026 21:13
@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Jun 24, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Warning

Review limit reached

@arutkowski00, we couldn't start this review because you've reached your PR review rate limit.

More reviews will be available in 23 minutes and 58 seconds. Learn how PR review limits work.

Your organization has used up its prepaid credits, and credit purchases are no longer available. Enable the review add-on in the billing tab to keep reviews running — you're only billed for reviews past your plan's rate limits ($0.25/file).

⌛ How to resolve this issue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based credits.

🚦 How do rate limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability.

For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window.

Please see our Fair Usage Limits Policy for further information.

ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 5a7f57b5-4d13-4c53-9a55-694b77738b5c

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 7b40f14 and 0c079fa.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • router/core/graph_server.go

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.

@dkorittki dkorittki left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good to me generally. It does not make sense to call the OnEvict hook to migrate lots of slow plan caches to the fallback cache when the new graph server is already created (and thus has created its plancache from oldplancache already). It's unnecessary work. I just added one comment which should be handled before I can approve.

Comment on lines +972 to +974
if s.planFallbackCache != nil {
s.planFallbackCache.Wait()
}

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actually I don't think we need to wait for pending writes to the cache at this point because we are about to delete the cache anyways.

@dkorittki

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Closing this PR because this is now handled in #3023

@dkorittki dkorittki closed this Jun 26, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants