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

Expose defaultUnaryMaxRetries and to make it configurable #13344

Closed
lilic opened this issue Sep 13, 2021 · 3 comments
Closed

Expose defaultUnaryMaxRetries and to make it configurable #13344

lilic opened this issue Sep 13, 2021 · 3 comments
Labels

Comments

@lilic
Copy link
Contributor

lilic commented Sep 13, 2021

grpc.WithUnaryInterceptor(c.unaryClientInterceptor(withMax(defaultUnaryMaxRetries), rrBackoff)),
uses the defaultUnaryMaxRetries to set the max retries, which is then checked if it is 0 and if it is we skip retries. But from my understanding, this can never be set or configured by users so it will always retry 100 times.

Retrying 100 times can result in very noisy logs (if the log level is warning for example), but also unnecessary retries if this is not something the user wants. I am proposing to make max retries configurable. In our (OpenShift) use case of the operator, we reconcile often enough that we do not require to retry 100 times.

Sorry if I missed something while going through the code!

@lilic
Copy link
Contributor Author

lilic commented Sep 13, 2021

cc @hexfusion for context, this comes from our noisy logs, where we see the retrying of unary invoker failed.

@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Dec 13, 2021

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed after 21 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

@stale stale bot added the stale label Dec 13, 2021
@stale stale bot closed this as completed Jan 5, 2022
@MatteoGioioso
Copy link

Hello, was this implemented? I cannot find a way to configure it.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants