-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 423
test: Undici proxy tests #3449
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
test: Undici proxy tests #3449
Conversation
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #3449 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 97.75% 97.62% -0.13%
==========================================
Files 405 405
Lines 54698 54698
Branches 1 1
==========================================
- Hits 53469 53398 -71
- Misses 1229 1300 +71
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
bizob2828
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This wasn't an issue with invalid urls. It was that they were using proxies which put the proxied
URL as path. I don't see any code changes to handle that. Let's sync up on this
|
pausing on this until we can properly replicate a customer issue we observed |
A customer attempted to use traditional
httpproxying withundiciwhich resulted in anInvalidURLerror being thrown. This is the intended behavior because undici doesn't support proxying by suppling a full url to itspathargument inrequest/fetch. These tests verify that bad urls error correctly and that correct undici proxying works as expected.