You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jan 13, 2023. It is now read-only.
We get read time outs when trying to generate our client libraries using gradle endpointsClientLib.
Caused by: java.net.SocketTimeoutException: Read timed out
at com.google.api.client.http.javanet.NetHttpResponse.<init>(NetHttpResponse.java:36)
at com.google.api.client.http.javanet.NetHttpRequest.execute(NetHttpRequest.java:149)
at com.google.api.client.http.javanet.NetHttpRequest.execute(NetHttpRequest.java:84)
at com.google.api.client.http.HttpRequest.execute(HttpRequest.java:1012)
at com.google.api.server.spi.tools.CloudClientLibGenerator.postRequest(CloudClientLibGenerator.java:65)
When cutting down on the number of endpoints, the generation sometimes succeeds. Our discovery doc size is 352K.
We believe that the generation is hitting the Appengine request duration limit of 60 sec. Locally (using https://github.com/google/apis-client-generator/), the generation takes 13 sec, but that method does not generate the same code structure as the endpointsClientLib task, so can't be used as a drop-in replacement/workaround. Maybe deploying to a larger instance size is a solution?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
We get read time outs when trying to generate our client libraries using
gradle endpointsClientLib
.When cutting down on the number of endpoints, the generation sometimes succeeds. Our discovery doc size is 352K.
We believe that the generation is hitting the Appengine request duration limit of 60 sec. Locally (using
https://github.com/google/apis-client-generator/
), the generation takes 13 sec, but that method does not generate the same code structure as theendpointsClientLib
task, so can't be used as a drop-in replacement/workaround. Maybe deploying to a larger instance size is a solution?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: