"Do While" Task: does each loop go through Decider/Scheduler service?

[rickyschechter]

1. I can see that there is a "startDelay" (seconds?) configuration value, is that delay all it takes between 1 loop completed and the next to be available to be polled? OR the Decider service will re-kick-in and do its logic to prioritize the next task in the loop against all other waiting to be executed/in-progress tasks in other workflows... priorities, concurrentExecLimit, rateLimitFrequency, etc.?

Basically I am wondering if a large processing do while loop (many iterations) would share (intermingle) worker executions with other same task name workflows (same/different tenants) or otherwise, acquires the "rights" to execute in a priority way until completion of the loop. Hopefully I am making sense with my question.

2. Please still answer my first question above, but also, is perhaps "name spaces" partially the answer to achieve resource utilization "fairness" across workflows (same/different tenants)? Could you please point me at some more documentation/example that might help me better understand the actual behavior of the system while using name spaces? (other than this https://netflix.github.io/conductor/configuration/isolationgroups/#execution-name-space).
   The link above mentions scaling horizontally, does it mean that to take true advantage of name spaces (resource isolation) I need to have a cluster of at least 1 server x name space I utilize?

3. The documentation reads several limitations with do-while system task, is there any restriction of using it in conjunction with name spaces?

4. I know how to create a worker for a given task name... How do I specify in the worker.client java library that I only want to consume tasks with "name space" of "XYZ" when I register the worker for polling (TaskRunnerConfigurer) for a specific task name?

Thank you in advance,

Ricky

Thanks!

[rickyschechter]

1. Per my testing I would say that each loop execution is put back in the queue to be re-analyzed by the Decider, so it is maintaining overall system fairness as it would be executing tasks for all workflows, not just for one until the loop is exhausted.

Please let me know if you think I have reached the wrong conclusion. Thanks

[rickyschechter]

2. and 4) probably I am misunderstanding partially how name-spaces are implemented and if so, both 2) and 4) would make no sense. I would think now that name spaces are for better isolation and horizontal scalability and it is accomplished by setting the "workflow.system.task.worker.executionNameSpace" of the Conductor server. So if a task definition includes a matching "name space" value, it will be processed on such server (isolated) from the others (including the ones not have it specified).
   I Understand that this is NOT about tagging the tasks and consuming them by name/namespace combination something specified in the Worker that polls. This is something I thought I could use for multi-tenancy, but I see here it is just proposed here: Introducing ‘namespace’ for workflow definitions, task definitions, etc #2402

Please let me know if you think I have reached the wrong conclusion. Thanks

[rickyschechter]

3. this question still stands:

_"The documentation reads several limitations with do-while system task, is there any restriction of using it in conjunction with name spaces?"

Thanks