feat(temporal): add composite metric (backlog + running workflow count) by Sanil2108 · Pull Request #7460 · kedacore/keda

Sanil2108 · 2026-02-18T11:07:34Z

Add includeRunningWorkflowCount (default: true) to use backlog + running workflow count as the scaling metric, avoiding premature scale-down when workers are fast and backlog is often zero.
Add optional workflowTaskQueueForCount to scope running count by workflow task queue (e.g. when scaling activity workers).
getRunningWorkflowCount() uses CountWorkflow with visibility query ExecutionStatus = 'Running' AND TaskQueue = ''.
On CountWorkflow failure, fall back to backlog-only and log at V(1).
Add tests for new metadata and default composite behavior.

Provide a description of what has been changed

Checklist

When introducing a new scaler, I agree with the scaling governance policy
I have verified that my change is according to the deprecations & breaking changes policy
Tests have been added (if applicable)
Ensure make generate-scalers-schema has been run to update any outdated generated files
Changelog has been updated and is aligned with our changelog requirements, only when the change impacts end users
A PR is opened to update our Helm chart (repo) (if applicable, ie. when deployment manifests are modified)
A PR is opened to update the documentation on (repo) (if applicable)
Commits are signed with Developer Certificate of Origin (DCO - learn more)

Fixes #7459
Docs: kedacore/keda-docs#1714

github-actions · 2026-02-18T11:07:47Z

Thank you for your contribution! 🙏

Please understand that we will do our best to review your PR and give you feedback as soon as possible, but please bear with us if it takes a little longer as expected.

While you are waiting, make sure to:

Add an entry in our changelog in alphabetical order and link related issue
Update the documentation, if needed
Add unit & e2e tests for your changes
GitHub checks are passing
Is the DCO check failing? Here is how you can fix DCO issues

Once the initial tests are successful, a KEDA member will ensure that the e2e tests are run. Once the e2e tests have been successfully completed, the PR may be merged at a later date. Please be patient.

Learn more about our contribution guide.

snyk-io · 2026-02-18T11:07:49Z

✅ Snyk checks have passed. No issues have been found so far.

Status	Scan Engine	Critical	High	Medium	Low	Total (0)
✅	Open Source Security	0	0	0	0	0 issues

💻 Catch issues earlier using the plugins for VS Code, JetBrains IDEs, Visual Studio, and Eclipse.

rickbrouwer · 2026-02-26T08:00:18Z

I think it's mainly solved by running this command from root so the schema's are created automatically:

make generate-scalers-schema

And the DCO of course :)

Sanil2108 · 2026-03-08T04:05:14Z

Relevant Keda docs PR - kedacore/keda-docs#1714

Sanil2108 · 2026-03-15T14:44:03Z

The tests are failing, is it possible they are flaky? They sometimes pass and sometimes fail

rickbrouwer · 2026-03-15T14:46:27Z

The tests are failing, is it possible they are flaky? They sometimes pass and sometimes fail

Yeah, that is a flaky test. It would be nice if it were solved soon.

=== Failed
=== FAIL: pkg/scalers TestWaitForState (6.01s)
    external_scaler_test.go:301: waitForState should be get connectivity.Shutdown.

=== FAIL: pkg/scalers TestWaitForState (re-run 1) (6.01s)
    external_scaler_test.go:301: waitForState should be get connectivity.Shutdown.

=== FAIL: pkg/scalers TestWaitForState (re-run 2) (6.01s)
    external_scaler_test.go:301: waitForState should be get connectivity.Shutdown.

Sanil2108 · 2026-03-15T16:41:29Z

The tests are failing, is it possible they are flaky? They sometimes pass and sometimes fail

Yeah, that is a flaky test. It would be nice if it were solved soon.

=== Failed
=== FAIL: pkg/scalers TestWaitForState (6.01s)
    external_scaler_test.go:301: waitForState should be get connectivity.Shutdown.

=== FAIL: pkg/scalers TestWaitForState (re-run 1) (6.01s)
    external_scaler_test.go:301: waitForState should be get connectivity.Shutdown.

=== FAIL: pkg/scalers TestWaitForState (re-run 2) (6.01s)
    external_scaler_test.go:301: waitForState should be get connectivity.Shutdown.

@rickbrouwer Understood, I can't rerun it as well, what should I do here?

rickbrouwer · 2026-03-15T16:45:01Z

@rickbrouwer Understood, I can't rerun it as well, what should I do here?

I will keep re-running it until it's green

Sanil2108 · 2026-03-18T11:23:12Z

@rickbrouwer I think they are all green now, PTAL

saifxhatem · 2026-04-08T16:01:06Z

Is there anything blocking this PR from being merged? It would be really helpful for me and I've been watching it every day for 2 weeks :/

rickbrouwer

Can you add a validation in Validate() that returns an error when workflowTaskQueueForCount is set but includeRunningWorkflowCount is false?

Without this, a user who sets workflowTaskQueueForCount but forgets to enable includeRunningWorkflowCount will silently get no effect from the parameter.

mwelk · 2026-04-09T10:45:44Z

We're also waiting on this — we run Temporal workers on EKS with KEDA and hit the same premature scale-down issue during long-running sequential workflows. The queueTypes: "workflow,activity" parameter helps for parallel activities, but for sequential workflows where the queue appears empty between activities, includeRunningWorkflowCount is the missing piece. Would love to see this merged. Thanks for the great work @Sanil2108!

Sanil2108 · 2026-04-16T20:25:47Z

Can you add a validation in Validate() that returns an error when workflowTaskQueueForCount is set but includeRunningWorkflowCount is false?

Without this, a user who sets workflowTaskQueueForCount but forgets to enable includeRunningWorkflowCount will silently get no effect from the parameter.

@rickbrouwer Done

Sanil2108 · 2026-04-21T03:58:56Z

Hi @rickbrouwer — just checking in. I've addressed all the review feedback (including the validation in Validate() for workflowTaskQueueForCount without includeRunningWorkflowCount). CI is green (the flaky test aside). Is there anything else needed from my side to get this ready for merge? Happy to make any further changes. Thanks!

rickbrouwer · 2026-04-21T07:27:22Z

+		if err != nil {
+			s.logger.Error(err, "failed to get running workflow count, skipping for activity check")
+		} else {
+			isActive = runningCount > 0


is this intentionally 0 or should it be > s.metadata.ActivationTargetQueueSize?

rickbrouwer

We're almost there. I see that DCO is still failing and that some unit tests are still failing. Could you fix this?

Add support for including running workflow count alongside task queue backlog as the scaling metric, so workers don't get prematurely scaled down when the backlog is frequently drained but workflows are still executing. New metadata fields: - includeRunningWorkflowCount (default: false) — when true, scale by backlog + number of running workflow executions. - workflowTaskQueueForCount (optional) — scope the running-count query by workflow task queue, useful when scaling activity workers whose task queue differs from the workflow task queue. Running-count query uses CountWorkflow with visibility filter ExecutionStatus = 'Running' [ AND TaskQueue = '<workflowTaskQueueForCount>' ]. On CountWorkflow failure the scaler falls back to backlog-only to avoid scale-to-zero on transient errors. Validate() rejects workflowTaskQueueForCount without includeRunningWorkflowCount so the parameter can't be silently ignored. Unit tests cover new metadata parsing, the composite path, and the validation rule. Ref: kedacore#7459 Signed-off-by: Sanil2108 <sanilkhurana7@gmail.com>

Sanil2108 · 2026-04-24T09:37:56Z

@rickbrouwer apologies for the churn — I rebased onto latest main and squashed into a single clean commit:

Fixes DCO (all commits now signed-off)
Pulls in latest main (branch was 54 commits behind)
Regenerated schema/generated/scalers-schema.{json,yaml}
Added the Validate() cross-field check that was lost during an earlier revert: workflowTaskQueueForCount without includeRunningWorkflowCount now returns a clear error

Local go test ./pkg/scalers/ -run TestTemporal is green. Please re-trigger CI when you get a chance. Thanks for the patience!

rickbrouwer · 2026-04-24T10:28:15Z

We will first wait until #7672 has merged in terms of order.

Sanil2108 · 2026-04-24T15:17:21Z

Sounds good, @rickbrouwer — will hold off until #7672 lands. Let me know if I should rebase after it merges, or if you'd prefer I leave the branch as-is.

keda-automation requested a review from a team February 18, 2026 11:07

Sanil2108 mentioned this pull request Feb 18, 2026

Enhance the Temporal scaler to use a composite metric that considers both task queue backlog and running workflows #7459

Open

rickbrouwer mentioned this pull request Feb 23, 2026

feat(temporal): add composite metric (backlog + running workflow count) #7476

Closed

8 tasks

Sanil2108 force-pushed the feature/temporal-scaler-composite-metric branch from 782db31 to 3f6bb6c Compare March 8, 2026 03:01

Sanil2108 marked this pull request as ready for review March 8, 2026 03:07

Sanil2108 force-pushed the feature/temporal-scaler-composite-metric branch from 3f6bb6c to 6d5c27f Compare March 8, 2026 03:56

Sanil2108 mentioned this pull request Mar 8, 2026

docs(temporal): add composite metric parameters to temporal scaler docs kedacore/keda-docs#1714

Open

1 task

rickbrouwer reviewed Mar 11, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread pkg/scalers/temporal_scaler.go Outdated

Comment thread pkg/scalers/temporal_scaler.go

Comment thread pkg/scalers/temporal_scaler.go Outdated

Comment thread pkg/scalers/temporal_scaler.go Outdated

keda-automation requested a review from a team March 15, 2026 11:39

Sanil2108 force-pushed the feature/temporal-scaler-composite-metric branch 6 times, most recently from cc169f8 to bfe999b Compare March 15, 2026 14:18

rickbrouwer reviewed Apr 8, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread pkg/scalers/temporal_scaler.go

rickbrouwer added the waiting-author-response All PR's or Issues where we are waiting for a response from the author label Apr 9, 2026

keda-automation requested a review from a team April 9, 2026 12:26

rickbrouwer removed the waiting-author-response All PR's or Issues where we are waiting for a response from the author label Apr 9, 2026

Sanil2108 force-pushed the feature/temporal-scaler-composite-metric branch from 2882049 to 55d8a82 Compare April 16, 2026 20:24

rickbrouwer reviewed Apr 21, 2026

View reviewed changes

carlydf mentioned this pull request Apr 22, 2026

feat(temporal): support scaling Temporal workers using Deployment Versions #7672

Open

2 tasks

Sanil2108 force-pushed the feature/temporal-scaler-composite-metric branch from 09fdd74 to 3d8526d Compare April 24, 2026 09:37

keda-automation requested a review from a team April 24, 2026 09:37

rickbrouwer added the waiting-on-other-pr All PR's that are waiting for an other PR which must be merged first label Apr 24, 2026

Conversation

Sanil2108 commented Feb 18, 2026 • edited by rickbrouwer Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Checklist

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Feb 18, 2026

Uh oh!

snyk-io Bot commented Feb 18, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

✅ Snyk checks have passed. No issues have been found so far.

Uh oh!

rickbrouwer commented Feb 26, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Sanil2108 commented Mar 8, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Sanil2108 commented Mar 15, 2026

Uh oh!

rickbrouwer commented Mar 15, 2026

Uh oh!

Sanil2108 commented Mar 15, 2026

Uh oh!

rickbrouwer commented Mar 15, 2026

Uh oh!

Sanil2108 commented Mar 18, 2026

Uh oh!

saifxhatem commented Apr 8, 2026

Uh oh!

rickbrouwer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mwelk commented Apr 9, 2026

Uh oh!

Sanil2108 commented Apr 16, 2026

Uh oh!

Sanil2108 commented Apr 21, 2026

Uh oh!

rickbrouwer Apr 21, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

rickbrouwer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Sanil2108 commented Apr 24, 2026

Uh oh!

rickbrouwer commented Apr 24, 2026

Uh oh!

Sanil2108 commented Apr 24, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

Sanil2108 commented Feb 18, 2026 •

edited by rickbrouwer

Loading

snyk-io Bot commented Feb 18, 2026 •

edited

Loading

rickbrouwer commented Feb 26, 2026 •

edited

Loading