Respect Retry-After in OTLP HTTP senders - #8633
Conversation
|
|
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #8633 +/- ##
============================================
- Coverage 91.60% 91.47% -0.14%
- Complexity 10343 10466 +123
============================================
Files 1013 1021 +8
Lines 27352 27679 +327
Branches 3215 3246 +31
============================================
+ Hits 25057 25318 +261
- Misses 1567 1617 +50
- Partials 728 744 +16 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
1249450 to
675f3c9
Compare
Pull request dashboard statusWaiting on the author · refreshed 2026-07-29 01:36 UTC Respond to 2 review items (e.g. link a commit, explain why not, ask a follow-up): Status above doesn't look right?
|
675f3c9 to
8cd225a
Compare
|
@jack-berg I pushed a follow-up in This update:
Could you please take another look? |
jack-berg
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just a couple more minor comments. Looks pretty good!
| class RetryUtilTest { | ||
|
|
||
| @Test | ||
| void retryAfterNull() { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The tests in here are perfect candidates for a parameterized test.
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @Test | ||
| void retryableError_malformedRetryAfterFallsBack() { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is there any observable different between this malformed case and the retryableError_retryAfterHonored case? For example, Could we configure the retry policy min / max backoff in a way that makes it clear when the time from the policy is being used vs the time in the Retry-After header?
Summary:
Fixes #8449
Testing: