[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-3238?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=18089544#comment-18089544
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on TINKERPOP-3238:
-------------------------------------------
kenhuuu commented on PR #3460:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/pull/3460#issuecomment-4725505103
> could you say what this change means in 4.0? I don't know that we have the
same kind of Exception hierarchy there anymore iirc
we still use ResponseException and could probably do something very similar
to what is done here. We don't have that same error code anymore but we do get
a "ServerFailStepException" as the exception type in the response so we'd use
that as the conditional instead.
> fail() improvements for remote applications
> --------------------------------------------
>
> Key: TINKERPOP-3238
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-3238
> Project: TinkerPop
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: documentation, driver
> Affects Versions: 3.7.5
> Reporter: Stephen Mallette
> Priority: Major
>
> {{fail()}} step throws a {{FailException}} in embedded mode - it's documented
> as such. For remote with websockets you get a 595 error code but a
> {{FailException}} will not raise even for Java. For HTTP you get a regular
> old 500 exception with an error message that says the fail triggered. Clarify
> this situation in the documentation and consider an approach that can
> actually raise a {{FailException}} in java for the 595.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
