|
- Use http status 202 for asynchronous operations - Stack Overflow
49 I think that your solution is fine, the Http status 202 is the proper response to use in this specific case indicating that the request has been accepted for processing, but the processing has not been completed What I would slightly change in your workflow are the Http status of the subsequent requests
- HTTP Status code 202 vs 200 for a POST request - Stack Overflow
The main purpose of using 202 instead of 200 is for a server to communicate to a client: "From what I can tell, the request looks good However, we haven't fully dealt with your request yet and we aren't 100% certain it's going to succeed" So if someone does a request, the server immediately responds and then forwards the request elsewhere, a 202 makes sense to me If the request fails at the
- Is it wrong to return 202 Accepted in response to HTTP GET?
Otherwise, a 202 "Accepted" status code is returned, and the client must poll the resource until the final representation is available The reason for this behavior is the following: If a result is available within a few seconds, it needs to be retrieved as soon as possible; otherwise, when it becomes available is not important
- return value - REST API 202 versus 204 - Stack Overflow
I'm dealing with a REST API and have this question, when a request is scheduled for further processing we should return 202, when a request has no response body we should return 204 What should we
- Phone Number Lookup
Type a phone number in the box below and click 'Search' to find out who is using that phone number
- HTTP Status 202 - how to provide information about async request . . .
What is the appropriate way of giving an estimate for request completion when the server returns a 202 - Accepted status code for asynchronous requests? From the HTTP spec (italics added by me): 202
- python - HTTP status code 200 vs 202 - Stack Overflow
The 202 response is intentionally non-committal Its purpose is to allow a server to accept a request for some other process (perhaps a batch-oriented process that is only run once per day) without requiring that the user agent's connection to the server persist until the process is completed
- Is the use of Location header in HTTP 202 response RFC-compliant?
I suppose they tried "to help us" preventing the creation of non-compliant RFC or nonsense response, e g 200 response with Location header doesn't make sense In the same way they assumed that 202 response doesn't make sense, therefore they override status code with 302
|
|
|