In the wild west of HTTP response codes, a 500 Server Error could mean practically anything. In my experience, you can't infer any semantic meaning for what a 500 status code could mean, unless you're very familiar with the server application.
I'd even go so far as to suggest, if a modification is made to PostHTTP, that all non-200 response codes should be penalized. The dataflow manager can always adjust the penalization timeout towards zero if a processing delay is not warranted. Unrelated, but this also reminds me, we really need a PenalizeFlowFile processor, which would allow a dataflow manager to penalize a flowfile anywhere that is deemed necessary, even if other processors haven't done so (have routed to success). On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Andrew Grande <apere...@gmail.com> wrote: > Wasn't HTTP 400 Bad Request meant for that? 500 only means the server > failed, not necessarily due to user input. > > Andrew > > On Wed, Aug 31, 2016, 10:16 AM Mark Payne <marka...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > Hey Chris, > > > > I think it is reasonable to penalize when we receive a 500 response. 500 > > means Internal Server Error, and it is > > very reasonable to believe that the Internal Server Error occurred due to > > the specific input (i.e., that it may not > > always occur with different input). So penalizing the FlowFile so that it > > can be retried after a little bit is reasonable > > IMO. > > > > When using the prioritizers, any FlowFile that is penalized will not hold > > up other FlowFiles. They are always at the > > bottom of the queue until the penalization expires. > > > > Thanks > > -Mark > > > > > > > On Aug 31, 2016, at 10:06 AM, McDermott, Chris Kevin (MSDU - > > STaTS/StorefrontRemote) <chris.mcderm...@hpe.com> wrote: > > > > > > I wanted to ask if it would be at all sane to have the PostHTTP > > processor penalize a flowfile on 5xx response. 5xx indicates that the > > request may be good but it cannot be handle by the server Currently it > > seems the processor routes files eliciting this response to the failure > > output but does not penalize them. What do we think of adding such > > penalization? > > > > > > On a related note. If a file penalized file is routed to a funnel that > > is connect to a processor via a connection with the OldestFlowFileFirst > > prioritizer will the consumption of files from that connection be blocked > > until penalization period is over? > > > > > > What I am trying to accomplish is this: I am using PostHTTP to send > > files to web service that is throttling incoming data by returning a 500 > > response. When that happens I want to slow down files being to that that > > service. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Chris McDermott. > > > > > > Remote Business Analytics > > > STaTS/StoreFront Remote > > > HPE Storage > > > Hewlett Packard Enterprise > > > Mobile: +1 978-697-5315 > > > > > > > > > > >
