-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 523
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
fix: requestTimeout monitors from sent #343
Conversation
46df119
to
49fde01
Compare
Some failing tests to sort out if this is an acceptable approach. |
Counting from the client queue makes little sense as a higher level abstraction (like Pool) might also have a queue. |
721fc28
to
6938d16
Compare
@mcollina this was not reviewable, fixed now, sorry about that. If you approve I'll sort out the tests as well. |
Can you add a test? |
I'll take that preliminary approval. Fixing tests. |
The change is ok |
@mcollina: I found another issue while working at this. Basically i had to change PTAL |
69979fe
to
3cc4fe9
Compare
e7f2ad7
to
cbac7da
Compare
8b7439e
to
6647f53
Compare
Another option is to just always destroy the socket if a running request at the head of the pipeline is aborted. KISS? I.e. skip abortedtimeout and maxabortedpayload |
Kiss! |
6cf731b
to
476b82c
Compare
@mcollina KISS applied. PTAL |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
lgtm
@delvedor FYI might also be of interest for you |
This changes so that requestTimeout measures how long a requests
has been in the pipeline (i.e. running). This is a more useful measure than how
long the request has been enqueued on the client, which is something
that is predictable.
Also normalizes the behavior between Pool and Client.
Fixes: #341
If user properly uses
Client.busy
there should be no difference in observed behavior.