This repository has been archived by the owner on Sep 5, 2023. It is now read-only.
fix: update timeout config for Insights apis #47
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
google-cla
bot
added
the
cla: yes
|
Closing this after discussions with the team that it will be fixed at the source config |
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Two options to fix #46 are to None the "retry_params_name" field, or to just use "no_retry_1_params" which is effectively a constant timeout. I went with the latter.
By naming the retry_params_name it will instantiate a google.api_core.timeout.ExponentialTimeout object built out of the retry params with 0 timeout leaving the "timeout_millis" in the method ignored. Instead if None is used a ConstantTimeout object is built and the timeout_millis is properly populated. So I don't fully understand why both are here, however using "no_retry_1_params" it is the same end result and leaves it consistent with some other methods.
Fixes #46 馃