-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 87
fix: respect max_parallel_requests in HTTP connection pool size #460
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
Open
przemekboruta
wants to merge
3
commits into
NVIDIA-NeMo:main
Choose a base branch
from
przemekboruta:fix/connection-pool-max-parallel-requests
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+45
−5
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
d482067
fix: respect max_parallel_requests in HTTP connection pool size
przemekboruta e558dd7
fix: document transport param and annotate private attr chains in tests
przemekboruta 088e037
refactor: address review feedback — public limits property, clean tests
przemekboruta File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
client.limits.max_connectionsreadsself._limits— a value that was computed correctly even before this PR. The bug was that_limitswas never forwarded to the underlyinghttpcoreconnection pool. This test passes on the old (broken) code just as easily as on the new code, so it provides no regression protection.To actually verify the fix, the test needs to trigger lazy transport initialization and then inspect the pool's
_max_connections. The PR description lists exactly these missing tests (all four checkboxes are unchecked):test_sync_client_pool_size_respects_max_parallel_requeststest_async_client_pool_size_respects_max_parallel_requeststest_create_retry_transport_forwards_sync_transporttest_create_retry_transport_forwards_async_transportThe existing test is fine as a unit-level sanity check for the
limitsproperty, but it should not be the sole regression guard for this bug.Prompt To Fix With AI