Worker pool pattern in Node.js - Interactive Code Practice

Practice - 5 Tasks

1fill in blank

easy

Complete the code to create a new worker thread.

Node.js

const { Worker } = require('worker_threads');

const worker = new [1]('./worker.js');

Drag options to blanks, or click blank then click option'

AProcess

BThread

CTask

DWorker

Attempts:

3 left

💡 Hint

Common Mistakes

Using 'Thread' or 'Process' instead of 'Worker'.

Trying to create a worker without importing the Worker class.

In Node.js, the Worker class from the worker_threads module is used to create a new worker thread.

2fill in blank

medium

Complete the code to send a message from the main thread to the worker.

Node.js

worker.[1]('start');

Drag options to blanks, or click blank then click option'

Asend

BpostMessage

Cemit

Dwrite

Attempts:

3 left

💡 Hint

Common Mistakes

Using 'send' or 'emit' which are not methods of Worker.

Trying to use 'write' which is for streams.

The postMessage method sends a message to the worker thread.

3fill in blank

hard

Fix the error in the worker code to listen for messages.

Node.js

const { parentPort } = require('worker_threads');

parentPort.[1]('message', (msg) => {
  console.log('Received:', msg);
});

Drag options to blanks, or click blank then click option'

Aon

Bhandle

Clisten

DaddListener

Attempts:

3 left

💡 Hint

Common Mistakes

Using 'listen' or 'handle' which are not valid methods.

Using 'addListener' which works but is less common than 'on'.

The on method is used to listen for events like 'message' on parentPort.

4fill in blank

hard

Fill both blanks to create a pool of 4 workers and store them in an array.

Node.js

const workers = Array.from({ length: 4 }, () => new [1]('./worker.js')); // Create 4 workers

workers.forEach(worker => worker.[2]('ready'));

Drag options to blanks, or click blank then click option'

AWorker

BpostMessage

Csend

DThread

Attempts:

3 left

💡 Hint

Common Mistakes

Using 'Thread' instead of 'Worker'.

Using 'send' instead of 'postMessage'.

Use Worker to create new worker threads and postMessage to send messages to them.

5fill in blank

hard

Fill all three blanks to handle worker exit events and restart the worker.

Node.js

workers.forEach((worker, index) => {
  worker.on('exit', (code) => {
    if (code !== 0) {
      console.log(`Worker ${index} exited with code ${code}. Restarting...`);
      workers[[1]] = new [2]('./worker.js');
      workers[[3]].postMessage('start');
    }
  });
});

Drag options to blanks, or click blank then click option'

Aindex

BWorker

DThread

Attempts:

3 left

💡 Hint

Common Mistakes

Using 'Thread' instead of 'Worker'.

Using different variables for the first and third blanks.

Use the index to replace the exited worker, create a new Worker, and send it a 'start' message.

Practice

1. What is the main purpose of using the worker pool pattern in Node.js?

easy

A. To increase the memory usage by creating many workers

B. To avoid using any background threads or workers

C. To slow down the program by running tasks one after another

D. To run multiple tasks concurrently using a fixed number of workers

Solution

1. Step 1: Understand the worker pool pattern concept

   The worker pool pattern uses a limited number of workers to handle many tasks efficiently without creating too many threads.

2. Step 2: Identify the main goal in Node.js context

   It allows running tasks concurrently but limits the number of workers to keep resource use balanced and improve speed.

3. Final Answer:

   To run multiple tasks concurrently using a fixed number of workers -> Option D

4. Quick Check:

   Worker pool = fixed workers + concurrent tasks [OK]

Hint: Worker pool means fixed workers handle many tasks concurrently [OK]

Common Mistakes:

• Thinking worker pool creates unlimited workers
• Believing it slows down the program
• Confusing it with single-threaded execution

2. Which of the following is the correct way to create a worker pool using Node.js worker_threads module?

easy

A. const { Worker } = require('worker_threads'); const pool = new WorkerPool(4);

B. const pool = new WorkerPool(4); const { Worker } = require('worker_threads');

C. const { Worker } = require('worker_threads'); const pool = WorkerPool(4);

D. const pool = new Worker('worker.js', 4);

Solution

1. Step 1: Import Worker correctly from worker_threads

   The correct import is: const { Worker } = require('worker_threads');

2. Step 2: Create a worker pool instance properly

   Assuming a WorkerPool class exists, it should be instantiated with new WorkerPool(4); to create 4 workers.

3. Final Answer:

   const { Worker } = require('worker_threads'); const pool = new WorkerPool(4); -> Option A

4. Quick Check:

   Correct import + new instance = const { Worker } = require('worker_threads'); const pool = new WorkerPool(4); [OK]

Hint: Import Worker first, then create pool with new keyword [OK]

Common Mistakes:

• Calling WorkerPool without new keyword
• Wrong order of import and instantiation
• Using Worker constructor incorrectly

3. Given this simplified worker pool code snippet, what will be logged to the console?

const { Worker } = require('worker_threads');

class WorkerPool {
  constructor(size) {
    this.workers = Array(size).fill(null).map(() => new Worker('./worker.js'));
  }
  runTask(task) {
    return new Promise((resolve) => {
      const worker = this.workers.pop();
      worker.once('message', (result) => {
        this.workers.push(worker);
        resolve(result);
      });
      worker.postMessage(task);
    });
  }
}

const pool = new WorkerPool(2);
pool.runTask('task1').then(console.log);
pool.runTask('task2').then(console.log);

medium

A. Runs tasks sequentially, logs task1 then task2

B. Outputs results of task1 and task2 as they complete, order not guaranteed

C. Only task1 result is logged, task2 is ignored

D. Throws an error because workers array is empty after first pop

Solution

1. Step 1: Understand worker allocation and reuse

   The pool starts with 2 workers. Each runTask pops a worker, uses it, then pushes it back after message received.

2. Step 2: Analyze concurrency and output order

   Both tasks run concurrently on separate workers. Results log as tasks complete, order may vary.

3. Final Answer:

   Outputs results of task1 and task2 as they complete, order not guaranteed -> Option B

4. Quick Check:

   Workers reused, tasks run concurrently [OK]

Hint: Workers pop and push back, tasks run in parallel [OK]

Common Mistakes:

• Assuming workers array empties causing error
• Thinking tasks run one after another
• Believing only first task logs

4. Identify the bug in this worker pool code snippet and choose the correct fix:

class WorkerPool {
  constructor(size) {
    this.workers = [];
    for (let i = 0; i < size; i++) {
      this.workers.push(new Worker('./worker.js'));
    }
  }

  runTask(task) {
    if (this.workers.length === 0) {
      throw new Error('No workers available');
    }
    const worker = this.workers.pop();
    worker.once('message', (result) => {
      resolve(result);
      this.workers.push(worker);
    });
    worker.postMessage(task);
  }
}

medium

A. Replace pop() with shift() to get workers in order

B. Remove the check for empty workers array

C. Add a Promise wrapper around runTask and return it

D. Call worker.terminate() after task completes

Solution

1. Step 1: Check runTask return and resolve usage

   runTask uses resolve inside callback but does not return a Promise or define resolve, causing error.

2. Step 2: Fix by wrapping runTask in a Promise and returning it

   Wrap the logic inside return new Promise((resolve) => { ... }) so resolve is defined and caller can await result.

3. Final Answer:

   Add a Promise wrapper around runTask and return it -> Option C

4. Quick Check:

   runTask must return Promise with resolve [OK]

Hint: runTask uses resolve but lacks Promise wrapper [OK]

Common Mistakes:

• Ignoring missing Promise causes runtime error
• Removing worker availability check breaks logic
• Terminating worker too early stops reuse

5. You want to process 10 CPU-heavy tasks using a worker pool of size 3. Which approach best ensures all tasks run efficiently without overloading the system?

hard

A. Create 3 workers, queue tasks, assign next task when a worker finishes

B. Create 10 workers, one per task, and run all at once

C. Run all tasks in the main thread sequentially without workers

D. Create 3 workers but assign all tasks to the first worker only

Solution

1. Step 1: Understand resource limits and worker pool size

   Creating too many workers (10) can overload CPU and memory. Using 3 workers limits resource use.

2. Step 2: Use a task queue to assign tasks as workers become free

   Queue tasks and assign next task to a worker when it finishes ensures all tasks run efficiently without overload.

3. Final Answer:

   Create 3 workers, queue tasks, assign next task when a worker finishes -> Option A

4. Quick Check:

   Fixed workers + queued tasks = efficient processing [OK]

Hint: Use fixed workers and queue tasks for efficiency [OK]

Common Mistakes:

• Creating too many workers causing overload
• Running tasks sequentially wasting concurrency
• Assigning all tasks to one worker blocking others