InfinityRazz Posted February 3, 2022 Share Posted February 3, 2022 Not 100% sure if this is the right place to post, but looking for an explanation as to what is happening, and why? As well as any steps I can take to mitigate these issues. Pre 4.6.10 (4.6.8 was my last update iirc) everything was working smoothly with little to no hiccups aside from us needing to add a random value to break caching requests... Post 4.6.10 update, every now an then an external rest api call just fails with no real explanation as to why aside from "Not Found" and an apparent html error 🤷♂️ (a json response would be nice here but.. pick and choose my battles I guess). This is breaking core functionality in some of our software... 😅 [11:48:02.9984688] Request 2 took 185.6433 ms with response OK <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0//EN"> <html><head> <title>404 Not Found</title> </head><body> <h1>Not Found</h1> <p>The requested URL was not found on this server.</p> </body></html> [11:48:03.6926108] Request 3 took 194.2472 ms with response NotFound Using RestSharp ++ .NETFramework 4.8 as such: internal bool TryGetNewToken(string n, string p) { try { if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(n) || string.IsNullOrEmpty(p)) throw new Exception("Username and/or password is invalid."); var client = new RestClient("SITE_REMOVED_FOR_POST"); var request = new RestRequest("/oauth/token/"); request.AddParameter("application/x-www-form-urlencoded", $"grant_type=password" + $"&scope=mainScope" + $"&client_id={Secret}" + $"&username={n}" + $"&password={p}", ParameterType.RequestBody); var response = client.Post(request); return response.StatusCode == HttpStatusCode.OK; } catch (Exception e) { Console.WriteLine(e.Message); return false; } } internal HttpStatusCode TryGetResponse() { try { var client = new RestClient("SITE_REMOVED_FOR_POST"); var request = new RestRequest("/api/core/me"); request.AddHeader("cache-control", "no-cache"); request.AddHeader("Authorization", $"Bearer {Token.AccessToken}"); request.AddParameter("r", (DateTime.UtcNow.Subtract(new DateTime(1970, 1, 1))).TotalMilliseconds); var response = client.Get(request); return response.StatusCode; } catch (Exception e) { Console.WriteLine(e.Message); return HttpStatusCode.Unused; } } Response has pretty consistent results, showing 13-18 requests out of 100 as "NotFound", with about 20 tests performed so far with various users. [11:50:41.9183552] Request 90 took 194.2145 ms with response OK [11:50:42.6474050] Request 91 took 227.8978 ms with response OK [11:50:43.3245941] Request 92 took 176.6468 ms with response OK [11:50:43.9987912] Request 93 took 173.866 ms with response OK [11:50:44.6749822] Request 94 took 175.6907 ms with response OK [11:50:45.3262392] Request 95 took 150.9032 ms with response NotFound [11:50:46.0213815] Request 96 took 195.3285 ms with response OK [11:50:46.7145255] Request 97 took 192.2333 ms with response OK [11:50:47.4126580] Request 98 took 196.4812 ms with response OK [11:50:48.1137846] Request 99 took 201.0716 ms with response OK Xemnas had 84 successful requests and 15 failed requests. while this may not seem troubling to most.. It actually breaks functionality of the software we use with the site. The software pretty much just checks and posts to one of our DB's that has a little more in depth info we need to track the usage of users, and again was working perfectly until the recent 4.6.10 update 😞 If this isn't something I can "fix".. is there any way I can just roll back to 4.6.8 where I know everything is working as needed(Cloud hosted with invision)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim M Posted February 3, 2022 Share Posted February 3, 2022 Is this something you're still seeing as of right now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfinityRazz Posted February 3, 2022 Author Share Posted February 3, 2022 24 minutes ago, Jim M said: Is this something you're still seeing as of right now? MUCH less frequently (roughly half the amount of errors), but still occurring sadly Test 1: [12:52:21.3203662] Request 72 took 145.6567 ms with response NotFound [12:52:22.0085308] Request 73 took 188.2309 ms with response OK [12:52:22.7285995] Request 74 took 218.8197 ms with response OK [12:52:23.4217559] Request 75 took 192.9039 ms with response OK [12:52:24.1089195] Request 76 took 187.471 ms with response OK [12:52:24.8070520] Request 77 took 197.3927 ms with response OK [12:52:25.5021927] Request 78 took 194.2392 ms with response OK [12:52:26.1933441] Request 79 took 189.737 ms with response OK [12:52:26.8974590] Request 80 took 203.9373 ms with response OK [12:52:27.5985828] Request 81 took 201.2729 ms with response OK [12:52:28.3036968] Request 82 took 203.8523 ms with response OK [12:52:29.0008316] Request 83 took 196.874 ms with response OK [12:52:29.6889913] Request 84 took 188.4713 ms with response OK [12:52:30.3970966] Request 85 took 207.4205 ms with response OK [12:52:31.0922380] Request 86 took 193.813 ms with response OK [12:52:31.7963541] Request 87 took 203.6311 ms with response OK [12:52:32.4914945] Request 88 took 195.2412 ms with response OK [12:52:33.2175529] Request 89 took 224.4799 ms with response OK [12:52:33.9196752] Request 90 took 201.5613 ms with response OK [12:52:34.5669429] Request 91 took 146.6126 ms with response NotFound [12:52:35.2570961] Request 92 took 189.8837 ms with response OK [12:52:35.9522367] Request 93 took 194.5353 ms with response OK [12:52:36.6723103] Request 94 took 219.6748 ms with response OK [12:52:37.3784215] Request 95 took 206.082 ms with response OK [12:52:38.0705701] Request 96 took 190.836 ms with response OK [12:52:38.7786764] Request 97 took 208.2627 ms with response OK [12:52:39.4738162] Request 98 took 194.2146 ms with response OK [12:52:40.1749409] Request 99 took 199.9162 ms with response OK Skulltoxin had 92 successful requests and 7 failed requests. Test 2: [12:54:05.2088340] Request 75 took 147.442 ms with response NotFound [12:54:05.8860229] Request 76 took 176.2721 ms with response OK [12:54:06.5871471] Request 77 took 200.4289 ms with response OK [12:54:07.2713170] Request 78 took 183.3394 ms with response OK [12:54:07.9574831] Request 79 took 185.222 ms with response OK [12:54:08.6516247] Request 80 took 193.2557 ms with response OK [12:54:09.3218336] Request 81 took 169.2788 ms with response OK [12:54:10.0189691] Request 82 took 195.5577 ms with response OK [12:54:10.6981501] Request 83 took 179.2729 ms with response OK [12:54:11.3813227] Request 84 took 182.1876 ms with response OK [12:54:12.0814499] Request 85 took 198.574 ms with response OK [12:54:12.7636268] Request 86 took 182.5127 ms with response OK [12:54:13.4617615] Request 87 took 196.615 ms with response OK [12:54:14.1529105] Request 88 took 191.4684 ms with response OK [12:54:15.4434567] Request 89 took 789.1152 ms with response OK [12:54:16.1425869] Request 90 took 198.62 ms with response OK [12:54:16.8247614] Request 91 took 181.8209 ms with response OK [12:54:17.4999575] Request 92 took 175.098 ms with response OK [12:54:18.1402425] Request 93 took 139.0103 ms with response NotFound [12:54:18.8294011] Request 94 took 189.2065 ms with response OK [12:54:19.5075871] Request 95 took 176.7521 ms with response OK [12:54:20.1937493] Request 96 took 185.8981 ms with response OK [12:54:20.8769240] Request 97 took 182.6609 ms with response OK [12:54:21.5610939] Request 98 took 184.093 ms with response OK [12:54:22.2522428] Request 99 took 189.5306 ms with response OK Skulltoxin had 94 successful requests and 5 failed requests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Management Solution Charles Posted February 3, 2022 Management Solution Share Posted February 3, 2022 Thank you for reporting your problem and for the detailed information. We were able to see the behavior you are seeing in our logs and are deploying a fix. It only impacted a few of our network endpoints which is why it was intermittent and kind of hard to track down. IveLeft..., SeNioR-, Jim M and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfinityRazz Posted February 3, 2022 Author Share Posted February 3, 2022 31 minutes ago, Charles said: Thank you for reporting your problem and for the detailed information. We were able to see the behavior you are seeing in our logs and are deploying a fix. It only impacted a few of our network endpoints which is why it was intermittent and kind of hard to track down. Can confirm, just ran another couple tests with 100% success rate 🙌 Y'all rock. ❤️ Jim M 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim M Posted February 3, 2022 Share Posted February 3, 2022 Excellent! Glad to hear that it's resolved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts