`ForEach-Object -Parallel`: consider changing the semantics of the `-TimeoutSeconds` parameter to apply to each thread or provide a new switch / parameter that does

Summary of the new feature / enhancement

The current semantics of the -TimeoutSeconds parameter are arguably unhelpful:

• The -TimeoutSeconds interval is applied to the runtime duration of the overall, typically throttled and therefore "batched" invocation^[1] rather than to the runtime of each thread.

  • Therefore, a timeout can occur even if each individual thread completed in less than the specified timeout. A simple example:

          # This times out when the 3rd thread runs, because - due to ThrottleLimit 2 - 
          # it only starts after 1.5+ seconds, after the first 2 threads
          # have finished.
          1..4 | 
            ForEach-Object -TimeoutSeconds 2 -ThrottleLimit 2 -Parallel { 
              Start-Sleep -MilliSeconds 1500
              $_ # Pass the input object through.
            }

• When a timeout occurs, the command terminates overall.

  • This means that threads for any remaining pipeline input then never even get to launch.
    • In the above example, only 1 and 2 print; input 4 never gets processed, because processing of 3 caused the timeout and therefore termination of the entire command.

Applying the specified timeout:

• on a per-thread basis...
• ... and continuing processing of the inputs even if a single thread times out

is arguably much more sensible.

Therefore, I suggest implementing the latter:

• Either: By simply changing the meaning of the current -TimeoutSeconds parameter, assuming it amounts to a bucket 3 change.

• Or: By introducing a separate parameter / additional switch parameter as an opt-in to the proposed semantics.

^{[1] More accurately, only a fixed number of threads are allowed to run at a time, based on the -ThrottleLimit arguments, which defaults to 5. If more threads are needed, they have to wait until "slots" open up, which happens when currently executing threads finish.}

Proposed technical implementation details (optional)

The following shows the desired semantics expressed in PowerShell code, applied to a slightly modified version of the example above, which provokes a timeout for the 3rd input object:

# Use -AsJob to receive a job that allows monitoring the threads individually.
# Note that -AsJob cannot be combined with -TimeoutSeconds
$job = 
  1..4 | 
    ForEach-Object -AsJob -ThrottleLimit 2 -Parallel { 
      if ($_ -eq 3) {
        # Provoke a timeout error for this specific input.
        Start-Sleep -MilliSeconds 2500; $_
      } else {
        Start-Sleep -MilliSeconds 1500; $_
      }
    }

# Receive job output in a polling loop, and terminate child jobs
# that have run too long.
$timeout = 2
do {
  Start-Sleep -Milliseconds 500 # Sleep a little.
  # Get pending results.
  $job | Receive-Job
  # If any child jobs have been running for more than N seconds,
  # stop (terminate) them.
  # This will open up slots for more threads to spin up.
  foreach ($childJob in $job.ChildJobs.Where({ $_.State -eq 'Running' })) {
    if (([datetime]::now - $childJob.PSBeginTime).TotalSeconds -ge $timeout) {
      Write-Verbose -Verbose "Stopping job with ID $($childJob.Id) due to running longer than $timeout seconds..."
      $childJob | Stop-Job
    }
  }
} while ($job.ChildJobs.Where({ $_.State -in 'NotStarted', 'Running' }))

Output:

1
2
4
VERBOSE: Stopping job with ID 4 due to running longer than 2 seconds...

Note:

• Input 4 was still processed, despite the thread for input 3 having timed out.

• The ID value of the child job isn't really meaningful except to distinguish it from other child jobs; if you want to know what input object caused the timeout, you'll have to echo it as part of the script block (at the start, before a timeout can occur) - the job object doesn't contain this information.

首先，使用 -TimeoutSeconds、-ThrottleLimit 和 -AsJob 重现 ForEach-Object -Parallel 示例。将当前的整体超时行为与提议的按线程行为进行比较，包括一个线程超时后继续处理的情况。当现有参数具有新的语义，或有一个文档化的 opt-in 参数提供这些语义，并且覆盖受限流控制的输入和已超时的线程时，即视为完成。