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 stall when piping gzipped response #1568
Merged
Merged
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
When the response content is piped through additional streams for decoding (e.g. for gzip decompression), pause and resume calls should be propagated to the last stream in the pipeline so that back pressure propagates correctly. This avoids an issue where simultaneous back pressure from the content decoding stream and from a stream to which Request is piped could cause the response stream to get stuck waiting for a drain event on the content decoding stream which never occurs. See request#1567 for an example. This commit also renames dataStream to responseContent to remedy my previous poor choice of name, since the name will be exposed on the Request instance it should be clearer and closer to the name used to refer to this data in the relevant RFCs. Fixes request#1567 Signed-off-by: Kevin Locke <kevin@kevinlocke.name>
simov
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 8, 2015
Fix stall when piping gzipped response
Thanks @simov! |
kevinoid
added a commit
to kevinoid/request
that referenced
this pull request
May 8, 2015
Due to request#1568, we now propagate pause and resume to the response content stream, rather than the response stream. However, when pause is called before the response arrives, the pause is still being applied to the response object directly. Fix this by applying it to the response content stream in both cases. This avoids the issue that if pause is called before the response arrives, it can not be resumed. Also add tests of the pause/resume behavior for both the gzip and non-gzip case both before and after the response has arrived. This commit also makes the ancillary change that resume is now called unconditionally (when defined) in Redirect, since we always want to dump the response data. Signed-off-by: Kevin Locke <kevin@kevinlocke.name>
kevinoid
added a commit
to kevinoid/request
that referenced
this pull request
May 8, 2015
Due to request#1568, we now propagate pause and resume to the response content stream, rather than the response stream. However, when pause is called before the response arrives, the pause is still being applied to the response object directly. Fix this by applying it to the response content stream in both cases. This avoids the issue that if pause is called on a gzip request before the response arrives, it pauses the response then resumes the response content, meaning the response can not be resumed. Also add tests of the pause/resume behavior for both the gzip and non-gzip case both before and after the response has arrived. This commit also makes the ancillary change that resume is now called unconditionally (when defined) in Redirect, since we always want to dump the response data (and it was previously called unconditionally in onRequestResponse). Signed-off-by: Kevin Locke <kevin@kevinlocke.name>
kevinoid
added a commit
to kevinoid/request
that referenced
this pull request
May 8, 2015
Due to request#1568, we now propagate pause and resume to the response content stream, rather than the response stream. However, when pause is called before the response arrives, the pause is still being applied to the response object directly. Fix this by applying it to the response content stream in both cases. This avoids the issue that if pause is called on a gzip request before the response arrives, it pauses the response then resumes the response content, meaning the response can not be resumed. Also add tests of the pause/resume behavior for both the gzip and non-gzip case both before and after the response has arrived. This commit also makes the ancillary change that resume is now called unconditionally (when defined) in Redirect, since we always want to dump the response data (and it was previously called unconditionally in onRequestResponse). Signed-off-by: Kevin Locke <kevin@kevinlocke.name>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
When the response content is piped through additional streams for decoding (e.g. for gzip decompression), pause and resume calls should be propagated to the last stream in the pipeline so that back pressure propagates correctly.
This avoids an issue where simultaneous back pressure from the content decoding stream and from a stream to which Request is piped could cause the response stream to get stuck waiting for a drain event on the content decoding stream which never occurs. See #1567 for an example.
This commit also renames
dataStream
toresponseContent
to remedy my previous poor choice of name, since the name will be exposed on the Request instance it should be clearer and closer to the name used to refer to this data in the relevant RFCs.Fixes #1567