chore: release 1.1.1

Patch rather than minor: the error surface is unchanged and no public
signature moved. What downstream must notice is timing, not types — the
worst-case call duration rises to roughly max_attempts * timeout_s now
that the retry budget actually applies.

Pre-release review caught an overreaching promise in the changelog entry:
the 429 bound holds only when the stall verdict can fire at all, i.e. when
the whole scope has no progress. The verdict is a conjunction, so a call
does not die while other calls in the scope are still producing — by
design — which leaves no hard per-call ceiling in that case. That property
predates this fix and is now stated with its precondition instead of as an
unconditional guarantee.

The wiki sync in the release checklist is a no-op again: the doc site has
been down since 2026-08-02 and its landing page names CHANGELOG.md as the
version source of truth, which this commit updates.
This commit is contained in:
2026-08-06 11:57:06 -04:00
parent f3e06eac89
commit 014fc2bfa7
6 changed files with 16 additions and 6 deletions
+3 -2
View File
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
# Changelog
## 未发布
## 1.1.1(2026-08-06)
stall 判定改为非生产性等待口径(issue #8)。`timeout_s ≥ stall_window_s` 时,**一次耗满超时的请求就会让整个 scope 被判死,配置的重试次数一次都用不上**——而且没有任何报错或 warning,配置方以为自己配了 3 次重试。`stall_window_s` 默认 300 恰是个很容易被 `TIMEOUT_S` 追平的值,"只配 timeout、不配 stall"这种最常见的写法正好踩中。
@@ -10,7 +10,8 @@ stall 判定改为非生产性等待口径(issue #8)。`timeout_s ≥ stall_wind
- **stall 判定的"本地超窗"条件现在只累计非生产性等待**——429 退避、配额 wait 轮询、熔断冷却;消耗重试预算的真实尝试不再计入。两个预算自此正交,划分依据是**谁消耗重试预算**: 烧 `max_attempts` 的时间不烧 `stall_window_s`,不烧 `max_attempts` 的时间(含 429 尝试本身)归 `stall_window_s` 治理。
- **`stall_window_s``timeout_s` 不再有任何耦合**,无需按 `timeout × retries` 放大。若你此前为绕开本 bug 把 `STALL_WINDOW_S` 调大过,现在可以回到默认值。
- **单次调用的最坏耗时由 `stall_window_s` 抬升到约 `max_attempts × timeout_s`**(默认配置下 3 × `TIMEOUT_S`,再加各次退避)。这是重试预算恢复生效的正确表现,但如果你的上游有调用超时,请据此复核。**429 路径不突破这个量级**: 429 虽免重试预算,但它的尝试耗时计入 stall 账,一次持满超时的 429 即耗尽 stall 窗口
- **单次调用的最坏耗时由 `stall_window_s` 抬升到约 `max_attempts × timeout_s`**(默认配置下 3 × `TIMEOUT_S`,再加各次退避)。这是重试预算恢复生效的正确表现,但如果你的上游有调用超时,请据此复核。429 路径同样不突破这个量级——429 虽免重试预算,但尝试耗时计入 stall 账。
**上述量级的前提是 stall 判死能够触发**,即整个 scope 无进展(`progress_age_s() > stall_window_s`)。判死是**双条件合取**,这一条未变: 若同 scope 里其他调用仍在正常出餐,本调用会继续等待换源而不判死——这正是双条件的设计意图("别人还活着,不该因我一路不顺就宣告整个 scope 死亡")。**代价是这种情形下调用级没有硬上限**,持续遭遇慢 429 的调用可以等很久。该性质由条件 B 单独门控,**早于本次修复即如此**(旧口径实测同样无界),不是本次引入;但若你需要调用级硬上限,请在调用方用 `asyncio.wait_for` 自行设置。
- 三条治理循环(chat / embedding / ocr)口径一致。**embedding 与 ocr 此前有同一缺陷**(经"先超时一次、再遇到无可用源"触发),issue 只记录了 chat 路径。
- 遥测收尾属"真实尝试"边界之内,**遥测抖动不会把一次调用推进 stalled 判决**。