Forking worked in theory but crashed the browser in system specs. It
also came with many other hurdles and isn't well known solution in the
Rails community. Sidekiq can give us better control over execution
limits as well.
Sidekiq doesn't have any features to limit memory usage or execution
time. We need a separate process for this. Forking avoids the boot time
of a fresh process and copy-on-write ensures minimal memory overheads.
This is supposed to lower the memory footprint of all Puma workers. The
reports code will occupy needed memory in one Sidekiq worker instead of
in several Puma processes.
The current code doesn't limit the execution time yet. We either need a
way to terminate the report rendering after a while or send an email
with a link to access a rendered report.
The ReportsController was referencing the report and the report was
referencing the controller. It's unlikely that this circular dependency
created a memory leak but it's generally a bad design. And we need to
make the reporting independent of the controller to isolate it in a
background job.
