This is an unofficial chat room, if you want to reach out to the Faraday core team, join us on GitHub Discussions (https://github.com/lostisland/faraday/discussions) instead
Hi :wave: I'm new to Ruby and Faraday. I have a use case in which I can get an existing Faraday connection instance with configured retry middleware but I need to override it with new retry configuration values. So far I am able to achieve this through deleting the existing Retry Middleware in @handlers array and then again initializing the connection object with retry middleware. Is there any other way to do it? I have a feeling I am not using the best practices of overriding connection here. Sample code is available here: https://gist.github.com/MaryamAdnan3/dc1e84674e37aea10e23ceb512e2992e
Hi @MaryamAdnan3! To be fair the Faraday::Connection is not meant to be changed once configured. The middleware stack is also locked once the first request starts, so your snippet will only work up until that point. Creating a new connection is actually the correct way of doing this. You normally would want a separate connection object for each API you need to interact with, rather than reusing the same one for all of them. If you provide more information on why you ended up wanting to remove the middleware, I can potentially suggest a better approach
Thank you @iMacTia for helping me out here. so I have a requirement in which we have configured the Faraday connection object already with or without the retry_middleware and users can pass us retry middleware attributes separately like backoff_max, max_retries, etc and can ask us to override the existing connection object with the new retry_middleware. So basically if possible I want to override an existing connection object with new retry middleware attributes. but what I am getting from your conversation is that we must create a separate connection object with the new retry middleware and use it, we cannot override an existing one. I can create a new one but I want the passing Faraday connection objects properties in it as well along with the new retry configuration attributes being passed separately. Is there any way to do this? I am hoping I'm making myself clear here.
Yeah I think that's clear, thanks for the context @MaryamAdnan3! The most immediate thing that comes to mind would be to have a "connection builder" method that returns a new faraday connection based on some parameters. Something like this:
def build_connection(retry_options: nil)
Faraday.new(...) do |f|
# other middleware
f.request :retry, **retry_options if retry_options.present?
# other middleware and adapter
end
endYou could then use this method to build your original Faraday connection object as well, so you won't need to copy over the handlers from one to another since the configuration will live inside this method. I'm not sure if this is possible in your specific case, but it would definitely be the cleanest way.
If you're not the one creating the original Faraday connection, then the only other option would be similar to what you're already doing, with the exception that you would need to always generate a new connection:
- Create a new connection (new_conn)
- Configure the new connection with all the middleware from the old connection (check
@handlersto see them) - Add the retry middleware to the new_conn
- Remember to always add the adapter as the very last
This is definitely a "dirtier" solution, but unfortunately necessary if you don't control the original connection
Hi team! :wave:
We would like to use a gem that has requires an outdated version of Faraday (<1.0). I am trying to verify if the version 0.17.4 is stable and if there are no known security issues with it. The idea is to start using it this older version and upgrade the gem to use a newer version of Faraday in the neart future so our service can also updgrade Faraday.
We would like to use a gem that has requires an outdated version of Faraday (<1.0). I am trying to verify if the version 0.17.4 is stable and if there are no known security issues with it. The idea is to start using it this older version and upgrade the gem to use a newer version of Faraday in the neart future so our service can also updgrade Faraday.
Hi @pedrombl 👋! Thanks for asking. The core team is not aware any security vulnerability and even if one was discovered we’d most definitely release a patch version of the 0.x stream to address that (assuming it’s an important one, obviously).
So I’d say as temporary solution it’s perfectly fine to use 0.17.x, just don’t expect any new features!
So I’d say as temporary solution it’s perfectly fine to use 0.17.x, just don’t expect any new features!
Hi there, i'm trying to create a class around Faraday so that i can set certain default connection variables across the team. Currently, i'm using builder to define my connection settings, is there a way i can pass builder as a class arguement if i ever want to override the connection settings on a new class initalization?
Hi @Physium, I'm not completely sure I understand, but the Rack::Builder is an internal class and it's not supposed to be sent around or used as an argument. My suggestion, assuming I actually understood the problem :smile:, is to have a connection "factory" or builder method like the one I described a few messages above
Hi all, is there a way test if a connection is set up with the respective params/options/middleware in rspec? context i'm creating a base class of sort with a default initializer that sets up connection. At the same time this class takes in a set of options which allows me to adjust connection configs accordingly on initalization. I looking for a way to test if the connection in rspec is configured correctly based on the options parse in, is there a way i can go about doing it?
Hi @Physium,
Faraday::Connection exposes a few attr_readers you can use to check these things. Check out https://github.com/lostisland/faraday/blob/main/lib/faraday/connection.rb#L21
params are exposed as-is and middleware is stored in the builder. As for options, there's a getter method here: https://github.com/lostisland/faraday/blob/main/lib/faraday/connection.rb#L222
Hi @iMacTia! thanks for being so on point with your responses. I checked out the builder but noted that builders consist of a handler attr_reader which shows an array of middleware class names. There seem to be no way to go deeper to figure out if the middleware for eg is being configured accordingly with the respective options
@Physium I know, that's a bit confusing, but what you see is actually a list of
Faraday::RackBuilder::Handler objects. The reason they show as class names in the Ruby console is because we override the inspect method (see https://github.com/lostisland/faraday/blob/main/lib/faraday/rack_builder.rb#L42). If you try calling conn.builder.handlers.first.class you'll see the actual class and if you call conn.builder.handlers.first.build you'll get an actual configured instance of the middleware.
Appreciate this is not ideal, but it's the only way I'm aware of to check what you need
Hi @iMacTia I just upgraded to faraday 1.8. Do you automatically filter "Authorization" headers while logging. I did
headers: true and was able to see other headers except "Authorization". Which is good actually just want to confirm. The API calls are still working so I guess you are not showing it intentionally for security reasons ?
by the way i am using basic auth like this
builder.request :basic_auth, user, password
@raghuvarmabh not to my knowledge, all headers should be logged if enabled with
headers: true. I suspect what is happening here is that you've put the :logger middleware BEFORE the basic_auth one :). The logger logs the request the moment it receives it, so if the :basic_auth middleware is added later in the stack, it won't have added the Authorization header to the request yet. If this is what you want, then it's a pretty good solution on how to log the request without exposing the Authorization header :D
@iMacTia any guess why it is happening ? My goal is to filter the authentication tokens in logs.
@raghuvarmabh You're adding the logger twice this way, I guess that's unintentional, you can merge the two lines like this:
builder.response(:logger, nil, headers: true, bodies: true,
log_level: Rails.application.config.log_level) do |logger|
logger.filter(/(Authorization)([^&]+)/, '\1[REMOVED]')
end
Will it be helpful to add a
filter_auth flag to logger which does the filtering thing. I will be happy to open a PR.
You’re welcome @raghuvarmabh 🙌!
filter_auth sounds a bit too specific. Maybe a more generic method to filter headers? I’d suggest opening an issue before jumping on an implementation so we could discuss a proposal (how would that be used, how it will differ from the current filter method, …)
Hey @dkam, that might be because you're using symbols to set headers or a known issue affecting Net::HTTP, I posted some more details in this comment: https://github.com/lostisland/faraday/issues/747#issuecomment-439864181
Hi guys, I am new to use Faraday connection for sending POST request. Based on some research, I notice that using net_http_persistent adapter (instead of the Faraday.default_adapter (which is net_http according to the Faraday documentation) will improve performance due to reusing the same connection. Basically, I would like to learn the best practice on some of the setting (like pool_size, idle_timeout, keep_alive and max_requests) for net_http_persistent adapter in order have a high performance and stable Faraday connection. Thanks in advance.
Hi @eddiecheung-shopify and thanks for joining! I personally don't have expertise in every Faraday adapter (hence why we recently went through the work of splitting them into their own repos), so I don't feel like the best person to provide "bets practices values" for their configuration. I hope someone here (@/all) will be able to help, but otherwise you could reach out to the
net-http-persistent team and ask them about this. In the end, Faraday is just a wrapper on the adapters, so whatever they suggest as the best approach will work in Faraday as well
1 reply
Announcement
We've decided to move over to GitHub Discussions for community discussions on getting help and asking questions.The Faraday core team will not be monitoring this chat anymore, but you're more than welcome to stay and continue the discussion if you prefer.
If you want to reach out to the Faraday core team, you can find us here
def initialize(options = {})
@config = Sso::Configure.new(options)
access_token = @config.access_token
@config = Sso::Configure.new(options)
access_token = @config.access_token
@conn = Faraday.new(url: Sso::BASE_URL) do |faraday|
# faraday.authorization :Bearer, access_token if access_token.present?
faraday.request :authorization, :Bearer, access_token if access_token.present?
faraday.request :json
faraday.response :json
faraday.adapter Faraday.default_adapter
end
end
Please help me on this
@giri5681 fairly certain it is that comma after
https://lostisland.github.io/faraday/usage/#:~:text=Detailed%20HTTP%20Requests shows using a block if making multiple calls, in the same way you have.
:authorization, :Bearer... which was previously :authorization :Bearer, ...https://lostisland.github.io/faraday/usage/#:~:text=Detailed%20HTTP%20Requests shows using a block if making multiple calls, in the same way you have.
Although https://lostisland.github.io/faraday/middleware/authentication#with-a-proc says I am incorrect in this and the comma is not the issue.
I am using faraday with rspec for single request I am facing below issue
NoMethodError:
undefined method `register_middleware' for Faraday::Adapter:Class
Faraday::Adapter.register_middleware(net_http: Faraday::Adapter::NetHttp)I have tried to install faraday_middleware gem but it is not found
Not sure where I am worng
@scriptmonkey If you are interested in robust chunked (HTTP range) downloading check out https://github.com/socketry/async-http/blob/main/examples/download/chunked.rb
Hello all!
I am new to faraday and net-http (we use the default adapter). I have a rails application and it calls many other services to fetch data using faraday gem. However, we are experiencing a lot of timeout errors and we were thinking of reducing the timeout value etc...
I wanted to try one thing, I wanted to collect few data here.
Given that I want to perform a GET API request
I want to log or print the value of the time it takes to open the connection with the server
And I also want to log or print the time it takes till the client starts or ends receiving the response back from the server
And I also want to log or print the time it takes to close the connection with the server.
(Iterating again, I am using Rails application :) ) How can I achieve this? Thanks!
Hi all.. Checking out Faraday to integrate into the Quepid project (github.com/o19s/quepid). Quepid interacts with various search engines via the users Browser hitting the search engine. Now that Chrome is getting tighter on permissions, I am looking at moving that logic from the client JS app to the Rails app on the server side.
3 replies
