-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 119
Feature parity between Storage client and other clients #3615
Copy link
Copy link
Closed
1 / 11 of 1 issue completedClosed
1 / 11 of 1 issue completed
Copy link
Labels
api: storageIssues related to the Cloud Storage API.Issues related to the Cloud Storage API.priority: p3Desirable enhancement or fix. May not be included in next release.Desirable enhancement or fix. May not be included in next release.type: feature request‘Nice-to-have’ improvement, new feature or different behavior or design.‘Nice-to-have’ improvement, new feature or different behavior or design.
Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Labels
api: storageIssues related to the Cloud Storage API.Issues related to the Cloud Storage API.priority: p3Desirable enhancement or fix. May not be included in next release.Desirable enhancement or fix. May not be included in next release.type: feature request‘Nice-to-have’ improvement, new feature or different behavior or design.‘Nice-to-have’ improvement, new feature or different behavior or design.
The
google_cloud_storage::client::Storageuses areqwest::Clientdirectly in its implementation instead of usinggaxi::http::ReqwestClientlike the GAPICs do.I think I missed the discussion on why we chose to do this, but at a guess it is because
Storageis the only client that does HTTP streaming, so there was no need to build that into the common gaxi layer.The consequence is that we are missing some common features handled by the gaxi layer. Such as:
Host:header.User-Agent:header.We will need to do some level of refactoring to resolve this. It looks like either:
gaxi::http::ReqwestClient, and use that from withingoogle-cloud-storagegoogle-cloud-storage