On Mon, 12 Aug 2024 13:27:12 GMT, Darragh Clarke <dcla...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Currently `HttpClient` will timeout if a server doesn't respond to a request >> which includes `Expect: 100-Continue` >> >> Section 10.1.1 of [rfc >> 9110](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc9110#name-expect) states that >> >> a client SHOULD NOT wait for an indefinite period before sending the content. >> >> >> >> This PR changes `HttpClient` to wait for a maximum of 5 seconds for a server >> response, this will be shorter if a timeout is set. If no response is >> received, the message will be sent regardless. >> This should bring `HttpClient` in line with how >> [HttpUrlConnection](https://github.com/DarraghClarke/jdk/blob/61386c199a3b29457c002ad31a23990b7f6f88fd/src/java.base/share/classes/sun/net/www/protocol/http/HttpURLConnection.java#L1305) >> treats expect continue timeouts. >> >> This is done using `orTimeout` in the `expectContinue` method , though there >> is some changes in `streams.java` where it was possible for race conditions >> to cause timeouts where `CompleteableFuture`s were removed from >> `response_cfs` prematurely or in some cases not removed at all. >> >> I've tested this against tiers 1-3 and it appears to be stable. > > Darragh Clarke has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > implemented feedback test/jdk/java/net/httpclient/ExpectContinueTest.java line 238: > 236: } > 237: } > 238: } These two seem to be identical: can't we just use ForcePostHandler both for HTTP/1.1 and HTTP/2? ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20525#discussion_r1713833343
