cluster: workers can't share socket if created with port 0 then recreated with assigned port number

[refack]

• Version: master
• Platform: *
• Subsystem: cluster

Found while working on #13100
Failing code can be found here

[sam-github]

server.listen(0) Normally, this will cause servers to listen on a random port. However, in a cluster, each worker will receive the same "random" port each time they do listen(0). In essence, the port is random the first time, but predictable thereafter. To listen on a unique port, generate a port number based on the cluster worker ID.

• https://nodejs.org/api/cluster.html#cluster_how_it_works

Cluster does not work for all use cases. Various suggestions have been made to improve this, they generally make one previously unsupported use-case work, and make a curretly supported one stop working.

[refack]

Ohh that makes sense.
The literal way doesn't work (bind in one worker, then communicate port number to other workers).

[sam-github]

You don't have to communicate to others. If you bind(0) in two different workers, you will get the same port in both workers, cluster will arrange this, no communication needed (by you). Unfortunately, as you report, if you bind(0) twice in the same worker, you will also get the same port.... which is almost certainly not what you wanted.

[sam-github]

and in case its not clear: if you bind(0) twice in one worker, and they got two different ports, as you would likely want, then when the same code runs in another workern and binds twice to 0... which of the binds gets which one of the two different ports from the other workere? Its impossible for node to know :-(, so it doesn't support this.

[refack]

and in case its not clear: if you bind(0) twice in one worker, and they got two different ports, as you would likely want, then when the same code runs in another workern and binds twice to 0... which of the binds gets which one of the two different ports from the other workere? Its impossible for node to know :-(, so it doesn't support this.

Yeah I saw the code, master indexes it under port 0 for sharing, so it works if and only if workers do one bind(0) (and only port 0, not the actual assigned port).
I agree it's not a bug, but a known limitation (we should have a known limitation tag)

[sam-github]

The docs could be expanded to not just describe how it works, but the kinds of thing that won't work.

[mscdex]

FWIW: #7043

[refack]

@mscdex #7043 looks promising, you plan to follow up? I could continue your work...

[mscdex]

@refack I think we still need to get some more input from other collaborators about whether it should be a behavior change or opt-in change via config option or something else.

[bnoordhuis]

Let's move the discussion to #7043. I'll close this out but FWIW, I'm supportive of making it configurable.