Open dllx opened 7 months ago
@dllx thank you for reporting this and for contributing a fix! We will soon merge and release a new version! Thanks! 😎
There is also something similarly wrong in the ExecutionTime.isMatch method if the nanos are not zero. I will provide a better test.
I'm experiencing different next execution time behaviour depending if the first field is seconds or minutes. I think that without any explicit kind of configuration, the seconds field should not behave differently than the minutes field. It's an unexpected inconsistency.
Given
I expect the following, and indeed that's what I observe:
On the other hand, if I add a
seconds
field into the definition likeI expect the following, but the result is different if the seconds field matches and the next second would also match the seconds field! In that case, the nanos field is not set to zero.
By the way, to possibly counter the "strange" expression
3/1
used above, the behaviour can also be seen when using a plain*
for the leftmost cron field. If it's "seconds", then thenano
part of thenextExecution
time is not set to zero, if it's "minutes", then thenano
(and thesecond
) part of thenextExecution
time is indeed set to zero.