Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on Mar 31, 2026. It is now read-only.

fix: check response code in batch.finish - #609

Merged
cojenco merged 2 commits into
googleapis:mainfrom
cojenco:error-batch
Sep 30, 2021
Merged

fix: check response code in batch.finish#609
cojenco merged 2 commits into
googleapis:mainfrom
cojenco:error-batch

Conversation

@cojenco

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

This adds a check to the top-level response code in batch.finish so that an exception is raised with the underlying error.

Fixes#608Fixes#404 🦕

@product-auto-labelproduct-auto-labelBot added the api: storage Issues related to the googleapis/python-storage API. label Sep 30, 2021
@google-clagoogle-claBot added the cla: yes This human has signed the Contributor License Agreement. label Sep 30, 2021
@cojenco
cojenco marked this pull request as ready for review September 30, 2021 18:22
@cojenco
cojenco requested review from a teamSeptember 30, 2021 18:22
@cojenco
cojenco merged commit 318a286 into googleapis:mainSep 30, 2021
cojenco added a commit to cojenco/python-storage that referenced this pull request Oct 13, 2021
* add top-level response status code check to batch.finish
* test exception is raised when batch request fails
cojenco added a commit to cojenco/python-storage that referenced this pull request Oct 13, 2021
* add top-level response status code check to batch.finish
* test exception is raised when batch request fails
@cojenco
cojenco deleted the error-batch branch December 3, 2021 23:47
@release-pleaserelease-pleaseBot mentioned this pull request Jan 12, 2022
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

api: storageIssues related to the googleapis/python-storage API.cla: yesThis human has signed the Contributor License Agreement.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Top-level response code error not checked in batch.finish Started getting random ValueError: Bad response: not multi-part exceptions

3 participants

@cojenco@tseaver@andrewsg