Allow clients to control Retry specification #259
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
|
I can add relevant doc and example if needed. |
|
Thanks, @dharmeshkakadia! While I do wonder about whether it might be good to make something more robust/aggressive as the default, this seems like a good middleground for now. A followup PR with a short example (and note of when it might be good to use) for the README would be great! Merging, in the meantime. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Notion frequently throws 500-504 errors, especially for large collections and pages. While there is existing suggestion (#234), I agree with the comment in the code, its risky to retry non-idempotent behaviour.
This PR will allow clients to specify the retry object as part of the client initialisation, since client has the best knowledge about retry safety. It's a new optional parameter and if not specified, it will use the current retry logic. I have migrated a a collection with 40000+ rows and 50000 pages linking into it with this changes. Thoughts?