Release/3.2.1 #435
Release/3.2.1 #435
Conversation
Previously `Content-Type` was not explicitly returned for POST requests. This would result in errors being logged for javascript tracker in Firefox[1]. Now, the behavior is rolled back to previous where collector would return `Content-Type` header for these requests. Addresses [BCPF-1102] and [PDP-1110] --- 1 - https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=884693
The goal of the feature was to prevent long body reads in GCP, this however does not prevent the slow incoming connection handling at the framework level. Therefore, as this adds unnecessary complexity with possible negative performance impact, the feature is removed. The configuration parameter is no longer used, but can remain as is.
Currently, healthchecks reside behind the same timeout settings as any other endpoint. We observed that when autoscaling under massive load, it is possible for collector to be taken down because of long health check responses. Which previously did not happen. We therefore move healthchecks above the timeout middleware to return to previous behavior. Additionally, this allows us to set arbitrarily short (or long) response times for the regular endpoints when necessary. --- Part of [PDP-1408].
The reference defaults should be less strict and match the settings we define upstream.
Previously, we would return 503 Service Unavailable, suggesting that failures should not be retried and leading to confusion with early timeout being hit. Now, we return 408 Request Timeout which is more explicit and easier to monitor.
peel
force-pushed
the
release/3.2.1
branch
4 times, most recently
from
703383b to
f066c37
Compare
| The format is based on [Keep a Changelog](https://keepachangelog.com/en/1.1.0/), | ||
| and this project adheres to [Semantic Versioning](https://semver.org/spec/v2.0.0.html). | ||
|
|
||
| ## [Unreleased] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should it have this [Unreleased] bit? Is there an automation that fills it out or something?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
According to keepachangelog the header should stay there: https://keepachangelog.com/en/1.1.0/#effort
For now there is no automation. We can get it done separately. The goal for now is to keep changes in readable sections so it's easy to find functional the differences between versions.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fair enough - I don't really like it and would argue that it's just noise on top of the Changelog, which doesn't seem to serve the purpose stated in that doc, because we never merge unreleased changes. IMO the same thing can be achieved by making a new section when we make a new develop branch.
But that's probably just a personal preference, I'm not bothered and wouldn't fight you on it. Certainly wouldn't block a release because of it! Just an opinion for consideration :)
Jira ref: PDP-1158