tzssangglass commented on issue #7919:
URL: https://github.com/apache/apisix/issues/7919#issuecomment-1247809968

   > it it possible that the client's network are too bad, which caused high 
P99 latency?
   
   The large number of 408 499 errors makes me feel like this.
   
   for 408:
   
   client_body_timeout(default 60s): Defines a timeout for reading client 
request body. The timeout is set only for a period between two successive read 
operations, not for the transmission of the whole request body. If a client 
does not transmit anything within this time, the request is terminated with the 
408 (Request Time-out) error.
   
   client_header_timeoutt(default 60s): Defines a timeout for reading client 
request header. If a client does not transmit the entire header within this 
time, the request is terminated with the 408 (Request Time-out) error.
   
   for 499:
   
   HTTP 499 in Nginx means that the client closed the connection before the 
server answered the request. In my experience is usually caused by client side 
timeout. As I know it's an Nginx specific error code.
   
   
   > 2022/09/15 06:08:26 [warn] 45#45: *479340 a client request body is 
buffered to a temporary file /usr/local/apisix/client_body_temp/0000002504, 
client: 1.2.3.4, server: _, request: "POST /sa?project=default HTTP/1.1", host: 
"xxx.xxx.xxx"
   
   And based on these logs, I think the possible reasons are:
   
   1. The network between client and APISIX is poor, APISIX cannot read the 
client's headers or bodies properly;
   2. The client request body is very large and the APISIX read timeout(based 
on the analysis of available information, this is closer to the truth);
   
   Can you trace the high latency associated with the large client request body?


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to