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

Thread pool rejection status code should be 429 #6629

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

kimchy
Copy link
Member

@kimchy kimchy commented Jun 26, 2014

Thread rejection should return too many requests status code, and not 503, which is used to also show that the cluster is not available
relates to #6627, but only for rejections for now

Thread rejection should return too many requests status code, and not 503, which is used to also show that the cluster is not available
 relates to elastic#6627, but only for rejections for now
closes elastic#6629
@bleskes
Copy link
Contributor

bleskes commented Jun 27, 2014

LGTM

@kimchy kimchy closed this in 79af322 Jun 27, 2014
kimchy added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 27, 2014
Thread rejection should return too many requests status code, and not 503, which is used to also show that the cluster is not available
 relates to #6627, but only for rejections for now
closes #6629
@kimchy kimchy deleted the issue_6627 branch June 27, 2014 09:15
@kimchy kimchy added breaking and removed review labels Jun 27, 2014
@clintongormley clintongormley changed the title Thread pool rejection status code should be 429 Internal: Thread pool rejection status code should be 429 Jul 16, 2014
@clintongormley clintongormley changed the title Internal: Thread pool rejection status code should be 429 Thread pool rejection status code should be 429 Jun 6, 2015
@lcawl lcawl added :Core/Infra/Core Core issues without another label and removed :Exceptions labels Feb 13, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants