[GH-ISSUE #265] Non-parallel run/lock mode #196

New issue

Closed

opened 2026-02-25 23:41:33 +03:00 by kerem · 3 comments

kerem commented

2026-02-25 23:41:33 +03:00

Owner

Originally created by @ttr on GitHub (Jul 4, 2019).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/healthchecks/healthchecks/issues/265

Hi,
Would be possible to have optional switch in check definition to allow only single run?
So if check is already running/started, throw error if another request to /start is received.

This way, if we have scheduled tasks that could overlap, healtcheck can be used as distributed locking system.

Originally created by @ttr on GitHub (Jul 4, 2019). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/healthchecks/healthchecks/issues/265 Hi, Would be possible to have optional switch in check definition to allow only single run? So if check is already running/started, throw error if another request to /start is received. This way, if we have scheduled tasks that could overlap, healtcheck can be used as distributed locking system.

kerem

2026-02-25 23:41:33 +03:00

closed this issue
added the
feature
label

kerem commented

2026-02-25 23:41:34 +03:00

Author

Owner

@cuu508 commented on GitHub (Jul 19, 2019):

Hello,

by throwing an error do you mean returning a non-200 response to the ping HTTP request?

@cuu508 commented on GitHub (Jul 19, 2019): Hello, by throwing an error do you mean returning a non-200 response to the ping HTTP request?

kerem commented

2026-02-25 23:41:34 +03:00

Author

Owner

@ttr commented on GitHub (Jul 23, 2019):

That would be quicker to check in scripts, but even json reply with information that job is already started could be sufficient.

@ttr commented on GitHub (Jul 23, 2019): That would be quicker to check in scripts, but even json reply with information that job is already started could be sufficient.

kerem commented

2026-02-25 23:41:34 +03:00

Author

Owner

@cuu508 commented on GitHub (Jun 20, 2022):

Thanks for the suggestion! This is doable but a little too far outside the project's current scope.

@cuu508 commented on GitHub (Jun 20, 2022): Thanks for the suggestion! This is doable but a little too far outside the project's current scope.