-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 198
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
GrpcTransportFactory fails to create when max retries is set to 0 #1514
Comments
I think you're right, and it should mean only one attempt is made. The test coverage could be better for |
I might have spot another related issue - after setting max retries to 1 another error popped out:
I guess it comes from grpc directly https://github.com/grpc/grpc-proto/blob/master/grpc/service_config/service_config.proto |
Right, then it seems like we could at least add some validation (and a test!) that |
I think adding a check and exception is a little improvement to developer experience as this will pop up earlier with clearer message. But I really would like to understand where does this grpc restriction come from. I'm not familiar with grpc concepts and maybe I miss some context. I also tried to look around but couldn't find any explanation. In the mean time I will try to put together a little PR. Edit: So in other words, when we create grpc transport and set I think we could also support |
That makes sense, @barell - I think that the PR doesn't break anything new, and it could be an enhancement where maxRetries=0 drops the retry policy. |
Describe your environment
PHP 8.3
open-telemetry/transport-grpc v1.1.2
Steps to reproduce
Set maxRetries to 0 when creating grpc transport.
What is the expected behavior?
Grpc transport is working and it does not attempt to retry on fail (the same configuration work on http transport).
What is the actual behavior?
Got error
I am not familiar with Otel ecosystem and do not know much grpc but I guess we should allow maxRetries = 0?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: