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

Fix requests with body #2

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

klauspost
Copy link

The body is needed for both requests, so we need to copy it, otherwise the second request will fail with a zero length body.

The body is needed for both requests, so we need to copy it, otherwise the second request will fail with a zero length body.
@edaniels
Copy link

@klauspost I've forked and added your change

@AlexYaroshenko
Copy link

@edaniels something still doesn't work http: ContentLength=1170 with Body length 0

@edaniels
Copy link

Hey @AlexYaroshenko, I didn't create this PR but I could try to help. Could you provide a more specific example that can be run?

@Fank
Copy link

Fank commented Aug 31, 2017

Works for me with:

	reader := bytes.NewReader(changes)

	req, err := http.NewRequest(http.MethodPut, a.Host+"/articles/", reader)

}
req.Body = ioutil.NopCloser(bytes.NewBuffer(body))
req2.Body = ioutil.NopCloser(bytes.NewBuffer(body))
}

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Reading the body into RAM isn't great if the payload is large. If req2.GetBody is non-nil we should use it to set req2.Body.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

req2 is a shallow copy of req, so they both refer to the same reader.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, and that's the issue being solved in this PR, with the drawback that the body is buffered in RAM. By calling http.Request.GetBody on the request we can get a fresh io.Reader for the second request and not have to copy the data.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ah, that is some new fancy tech from Go 1.8 :D

You could also check if the reader is seekable... but this PR is dead anyway. Just leaving it here for others, not using it any more.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Wow what a coincidence that this was discussed/revived in the last 24 hours. I spent 30 minutes debugging this problem and then an hour or two of research to find that this library had the bug of not cloning the Body. Most of the other clients I have seen do read the body into memory to clone it and none of them have been using GetBody. Any movement on this merge request? I've since switched to another library that is copying:
https://github.com/gabstv/httpdigest/blob/master/transport.go#L105

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oh dear, another digest package. I thought I'd found all of them yesterday. I'd say the chances of this PR getting merged are close to zero, but perhaps one of the other similar packages takes PRs. I've been using github.com/toaster/digest myself. I'll probably send a PR to it for adding support for http.Request.GetBody.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@edaniels
Copy link

edaniels commented May 29, 2020

I've had it forked here for a while with no issues: https://github.com/mongodb-forks/digest. The duplicate body isn't a concern in my case since we limit the amount of bytes read/written initially. Happy to integrate a version using GetBody though!

@magnusbaeck
Copy link

Thanks @edaniels, I've sent mongodb-forks#1 now.

@edaniels
Copy link

@bobziuchkovski bump

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants