Having tasks in pending status before reaching num of worker limit - SonarQube Enterprise 7.7

Hi there,

We are new to SonarQube Enterprise and are experiencing a problem with many tasks in the pending status while the number of in-progress tasks is lower than the number of concurrent workers configured.

The number of Worker Count is 6, the number of in-progress tasks is less than 3, whilst the Pending tasks can sometimes higher than 10. The installation is on an EC2 with 8 vCPU and 32gb memory.

Must-share information (formatted with [Markdown]

  • which versions are you using (SonarQube, Scanner, Plugin, and any relevant extension)

    1. SonarQube Enterprise Edition
    2. Scanner - sonar-scanner-protocol-7.7.jar
    3. Plug-ins:
  • what are you trying to achieve
    Increase the number of concurrent workers and reduce/shorten the number and time a task being in the pending status.

  • what have you tried so far to achieve this?
    I have upgraded the license, upgraded the server specs, followed this guide to tweak the configurations https://docs.sonarqube.org/latest/instance-administration/compute-engine-performance/ . I’ve run out of ideas, please help.


Hi Ryan,

Take a look, please at your Administration > System page. Expand the Comput Engine Tasks and look at the worker counts. What do you see there? Here’s what I see in one of our systems:



Hi Ann,

Thank you for your reply, the Worker Count is 6. I didn’t set it to 10 since we only have an EC2 instance with 8 vCPUs.


Hello Ryan,

Is it possible that your multiple tasks that are pending are related to the same SonarQube project?

There is a limitation right now in situations where multiple branches/pull requests of the same project are being analyzed. In these instances, only one task will go through at a time (branches interact with each other to some extent with regard to issue tracking)

This is a situation we want to improve, and there’s a feature out there (MMF-1543) you can take a look at.

Let me know if this sounds like what’s going on with your SQ instance.


Hi Colin,

Thank you for your reply. The issue is very likely to be caused by the problem that you’ve mentioned. I will run some tests to confirm it.