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

Retry on rate-limiting could be smarter #11

Open
tonistiigi opened this issue Nov 26, 2021 · 0 comments
Open

Retry on rate-limiting could be smarter #11

tonistiigi opened this issue Nov 26, 2021 · 0 comments

Comments

@tonistiigi
Copy link
Owner

Server sends some extra headers with 429 as visible in docker/buildx#841 (comment)

2021-11-25T11:07:28.4672333Z 2021/11/25 11:07:26 < response 429 Too Many Requests map[Activityid:[3db07705-7b00-43ef-b1bf-d9d6ce0d8a44] Content-Length:[315] Content-Type:[application/json] Date:[Thu, 25 Nov 2021 11:07:26 GMT] Retry-After:[60] Strict-Transport-Security:[max-age=2592000] X-Cache:[CONFIG_NOCACHE] X-Frame-Options:[SAMEORIGIN] X-Msedge-Ref:[Ref A: A66EBD35FE94468991D34EC956C93CBB Ref B: ASHEDGE1519 Ref C: 2021-11-25T11:07:26Z] X-Ratelimit-Limit:[493] X-Ratelimit-Remaining:[0] X-Ratelimit-Reset:[1637838743] X-Ratelimit-Resource:[ArtifactCache/Short] X-Tfs-Processid:[2ef82cec-56f3-4c18-b269-d6d60d120383] X-Tfs-Serviceerror:[Request+was+blocked+due+to+exceeding+usage+of+resource+%27Count%27+in+namespace+%27%27.] X-Tfs-Session:[3db07705-7b00-43ef-b1bf-d9d6ce0d8a44] X-Vss-E2eid:[3db07705-7b00-43ef-b1bf-d9d6ce0d8a44] X-Vss-Senderdeploymentid:[5f814983-29e7-4f0f-d4b8-8016a66b281b]]

We could use Retry-After, X-Ratelimit-Reset for smarter timeout between retries instead of the current one that tries to detect it on client side.

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

No branches or pull requests

1 participant