Is there a reason that IntervalClock sets the minimum interval at 60 seconds? It would be useful in my application to allow shorter intervals even if they fired multiple times in the same scheduling cycle. My tests with IntervalClock and IntervalSchedule seem to indicate short intervals work as expected.
12/26/2019, 10:52 PM
Hey @Daryll Strauss! In short, this behavior was originally implemented to prevent users from missing runs; we can remove this lower bound, but users will need to be aware that if your flow runs take longer than the interval duration to run, you will miss some runs
Similarly, if you deploy your Flows using Prefect Cloud, there is a lower bound to the allowable interval on which our scheduler can guarantee no work is missed; if we remove this we will most likely preserve the lower bound for Cloud Flows — feel free to open an issue for a feature request for this!
12/26/2019, 10:58 PM
I think it makes more sense at your cloud layer. 60 seconds is arbitrary for other use cases. I can file an issue and submit a pull request for core if you'd like. It's a 1 liner.
12/26/2019, 10:59 PM
yea, that’d be great! I can follow-up with the corresponding PR that prevents Cloud deploys with sub-second intervals 👍