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

Consider moving traffic shaping plugins earlier in the request lifecycle #5236

Open
xuorig opened this issue May 24, 2024 · 0 comments
Open
Assignees
Labels
potentially-breaking Requires an incompatible change raised by user

Comments

@xuorig
Copy link
Contributor

xuorig commented May 24, 2024

Currently timeouts and rate limits are applied as a tower service around the supergraph service. There is a lot happening between receiving a request over the wire and the beginning of the supergraph service. (Parsing, PQ, etc).

A benefit of having those at the supergraph service is that more information is available (operation_name or pq_id for example), which can be useful for more dynamic traffic shaping. However, a bare-bones, sane default timeout/limits is still important, potentially as early as axum.

Let me know if you have any thoughts on this.

@garypen garypen added the potentially-breaking Requires an incompatible change label Jun 3, 2024
@garypen garypen self-assigned this Jun 3, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
potentially-breaking Requires an incompatible change raised by user
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants