Skip to content
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

Remove httpRequestTimeout and executionTimeout features #494

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 23, 2018

Conversation

zoewangg
Copy link
Contributor

Remove httpRequestTimeout and executionTimeout

@@ -90,7 +89,6 @@ public void interruptCausedBySomethingOtherThanTimer_PropagatesInterruptToCaller

ClientOverrideConfiguration overrideConfiguration =
ClientOverrideConfiguration.builder()
.totalExecutionTimeout(TimeoutTestConstants.CLIENT_EXECUTION_TIMEOUT)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

How are these tests working if we don't have a timeout anymore?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

yeah, they failed along with other tests. Fixed them(adding ignore).

Running integ tests now and will wait and see if there are more failing.

@zoewangg zoewangg force-pushed the zoewang-disableRequestExecutionTimeouts branch from 90a62b4 to 136567c Compare May 22, 2018 23:41
@zoewangg zoewangg merged commit b1bd682 into master May 23, 2018
@zoewangg zoewangg deleted the zoewang-disableRequestExecutionTimeouts branch May 23, 2018 00:12
@sedovalx
Copy link

Can you explain why the timeouts were removed?

@millems
Copy link
Contributor

millems commented May 29, 2018

The timeouts were not functioning with async clients, and we are discussing merging the async and sync code paths (assuming we can avoid latency issues). That merger would break the timeouts for sync, so we felt it best that we remove the feature rather than knowingly breaking it underneath the hood.

We intend to re-add the feature at a later date before GA. Sorry about that! We know this is an important feature for a lot of people's use-cases.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants