Skip to content

Document Retry-After header support for async retries#425

Open
welteki wants to merge 1 commit intoopenfaas:masterfrom
welteki:retry-after-header
Open

Document Retry-After header support for async retries#425
welteki wants to merge 1 commit intoopenfaas:masterfrom
welteki:retry-after-header

Conversation

@welteki
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@welteki welteki commented Apr 3, 2026

Description

Add a new "Retry-After header" section to the retries documentation explaining
how functions can return a Retry-After header on 429 responses to control
the next retry delay in the queue-worker.

Motivation and Context

The jetstream queue-worker now supports the Retry-After response header.
This documents the feature for users.

  • I have raised an issue to propose this change (required)

How Has This Been Tested?

Reviewed the rendered output locally against the existing doc structure.

Types of changes

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)

Checklist:

  • My code follows the code style of this project.
  • My change requires a change to the documentation.
  • I have updated the documentation accordingly.
  • I've read the CONTRIBUTION guide
  • I have signed-off my commits with git commit -s

Add a section explaining how functions can return a Retry-After header
on 429 responses to control the retry delay.

Signed-off-by: Han Verstraete (OpenFaaS Ltd) <han@openfaas.com>
@reviewfn
Copy link
Copy Markdown

reviewfn bot commented Apr 3, 2026

AI Pull Request Overview

Summary

  • Adds documentation for the new Retry-After header support in the queue-worker for async retries
  • Explains how functions can use the Retry-After header with 429 responses to control retry delays
  • Documents that only delay-seconds format is supported, not HTTP-date
  • Specifies behavior when header value is below minimum retry wait
  • Section placed appropriately after jitter configuration and before usage examples

Approval rating (1-10)

8 - Well-written documentation for a useful feature, accurate and clear, no major issues found.

Summary per file

Summary per file
File path Summary
docs/openfaas-pro/retries.md Added new section documenting Retry-After header support for controlling retry delays on 429 responses

Overall Assessment

The PR successfully documents the Retry-After header feature for async retries in OpenFaaS Pro. The documentation is clear, accurate, and integrates well with the existing retries guide. No technical issues or inconsistencies identified.

Detailed Review

Detailed Review

docs/openfaas-pro/retries.md

  • Placement: The new "## Retry-After header" section is appropriately positioned after the jitter configuration and before the usage section, maintaining logical flow.
  • Content Accuracy: The explanation of the Retry-After header aligns with HTTP standards (RFC 7231) and correctly describes its use for 429 status codes in rate limiting scenarios.
  • Implementation Details: Clearly states that only delay-seconds format is supported, not HTTP-date, which is a reasonable limitation for this implementation.
  • Edge Case Handling: Properly documents the behavior when the header value is below the configured minimum retry wait, ensuring users understand the precedence.
  • Formatting: Uses consistent markdown formatting with the rest of the document, including proper code blocks for examples.
  • Clarity: The description is concise yet comprehensive, explaining both the purpose and usage without unnecessary verbosity.
  • Consistency: Terminology matches existing documentation (e.g., references to initialRetryWait and com.openfaas.retry.min_wait).
  • No Issues Found: The documentation accurately reflects the feature as described in the PR motivation and appears complete for user understanding.

AI agent details.

Agent processing time: 23.452s
Environment preparation time: 4.294s
Total time from webhook: 31.954s

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant