Send packet only with POST method. #470
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
❗ Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #470 +/- ##
============================================
- Coverage 87.12% 86.99% -0.14%
+ Complexity 364 358 -6
============================================
Files 32 32
Lines 1429 1422 -7
Branches 165 162 -3
============================================
- Hits 1245 1237 -8
- Misses 115 116 +1
Partials 69 69 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
| int packets = (int) Math.ceil(events.size() * 1.0 / PAGE_SIZE); | ||
| List<Packet> freshPackets = new ArrayList<>(packets); | ||
| for (int i = 0; i < events.size(); i += PAGE_SIZE) { | ||
| List<Event> batch = events.subList(i, Math.min(i + PAGE_SIZE, events.size())); | ||
| final Packet packet; | ||
| if (batch.size() == 1) packet = buildPacketForGet(batch.get(0)); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't remember why I did it this way 🤔.
Might have been an optimization, i.e. GET having less overhead than POST for single events. In hindsight I don't think the overhead would be huge enough to warrant both GET and POST.
I'm neutral on this change.
@nostromoo Please consider adding some descriptions to your PRs. What made you change this?
|
@nostromoo Please keep me informed |
|
Now I see the linked #468. Did something change on the server-side? According to docs (the last time I checked) the server should accept both GET and POST. 🤷 This could warrant further debugging to find out why If it's the later, changing the SDK seems like the wrong way to fix it 😁. |
I did it |
Any suggestion what's the right way |
Check if single @mattab Did the server's behavior for |
Closes #468