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

better error message on too-large chunked response [risk: low] #686

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Nov 14, 2018

Conversation

davidangb
Copy link
Contributor

@davidangb davidangb commented Nov 12, 2018

DataBiosphere/firecloud-app#83

if orch receives a chunked response from a subsystem, and that response is over the response-chunk-aggregation-limit size limit, we previously returned an error message that was confusing to end users: "sendReceive doesn't support chunked responses, try sendTo instead"

This PR attempts to make that error message more understandable.


Have you read CONTRIBUTING.md lately? If not, do that first.

I, the developer opening this PR, do solemnly pinky swear that:

  • I've followed the instructions if I've made any changes to the API, especially if they're breaking changes
  • I've updated the RC_XXX release ticket with any manual steps required to release this change
  • I've updated the FISMA documentation if I've made any security-related changes, including auth, encryption, or auditing

In all cases:

  • Get two thumbsworth of review and PO signoff if necessary
  • Verify all tests go green
  • Squash and merge; you can delete your branch after this unless it's for a hotfix. In that case, don't delete it!
  • Test this change deployed correctly and works on dev environment after deployment

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Nov 12, 2018

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-0.05%) to 67.045% when pulling 3119d7c on da_83_chunkError into 00143d1 on develop.

Copy link
Contributor

@rtitle rtitle left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Not a big fan of parsing error message strings as it's unreliable (and will break if/when we upgrade to akka-http). But I don't really have a better alternative, and I agree the new error message is much better. 👍

@davidangb
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks - I agree it's unreliable in the face of upgrades, but the "failure" case in this code is to fall back to the current behavior of case Failure(error) => ... we'd simply stop rewording this particular error.

@davidangb davidangb merged commit caec62a into develop Nov 14, 2018
@davidangb davidangb deleted the da_83_chunkError branch November 14, 2018 15:31
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
3 participants