Shane Krueger
Shane Krueger
Does the distributed GraphQL executor currently support 'regular' batching requests?
So it would support variable batching within request batching then?
Ok. I would suggest that we do not use the jsonl format. 1. If there is variable batching within request batching, there is no clear way to format such a...
> here's a JSONL parser for JS: > > ```js > const parseJSONL = (jsonl) => JSON.parse(`[${jsonl.trim().replaceAll('\n', ',')}]`); > ``` Fair enough; I didn't think of that. > I'm not...
> > Probably true. I may have another viewpoint if I was more familiar with the use case (which I am not). > > In general batching is used when...
> > Or perhaps a streaming wrapper that changed the characters similar to the JS conversion above so it could be read as JSON (but that would be even more...
> Maybe we should focus on a flag of some sort to allow this behavior for traditional batching requests, and then take the solution to this PR for consistency. For...
My thoughts: ## 203 Non-Authoratative Information Benefits: - Proxies, firewalls and clients are unlikely to refuse a document because the code is 203; this would be a normal and expected...
It should be noted that since most all requests will be HTTPS, the above firewall considerations only apply to application-level firewalls (Secure Web Gateway), as regular firewalls would not have...
I would select 207 because its exact description matches our use case. But first I would prefer to see some testing with commonly used Secure Web Gateways. I wouldn't worry...