GitHub Pull Request diff API responds with 406 — diff too large #1696

reidab · 2024-03-25T20:03:46Z

We've started seeing several of our GitHub actions builds with reviewdog fail this morning because the GitHub API is returning a 406 error code on diffs larger than 3,000 lines. This seems to be new GitHub API behavior because the same version of reviewdog worked was passing on these same PRs three days ago.

The error message currently has no relevant Google results. Searching around on GitHub, I only find one mention of Code:too_large with field: diff anywhere, and it's from another reviewdog user today: platformsh/platformsh-docs#3885 (comment)

We've seen this both when running from actions like https://github.com/reviewdog/action-brakeman and from custom actions that invoke reviewdog manually.

An example reviewdog error when running with reviewdog -name=Hadolint -reporter=github-check -efm='%f:%l %m' -level=warning:

reviewdog: post failed for Hadolint: fail to parse diff: 
GET https://api.github.com/repos/thedyrt/<redacted>/pulls/<redacted>: 
406 Sorry, the diff exceeded the maximum number of lines (3000)
 [{Resource:PullRequest Field:diff Code:too_large Message:}]

The API response from GitHub:

{
  "message": "Sorry, the diff exceeded the maximum number of lines (3000)",
  "errors": [
    {
      "resource": "PullRequest",
      "field": "diff",
      "code": "too_large"
    }
  ],
  "documentation_url": "https://docs.github.com/rest/pulls/pulls#get-a-pull-request"
}

The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:

chrisdp · 2024-03-25T22:34:19Z

Seeing similar issues with PRs with lots of files. We have an automation to sync assets from designers and it had around 1200 files changed. Failed in the same way but with a different message about to many files.

atiqueakhtar · 2024-03-26T10:52:58Z

Hi @haya14busa ,

Encountering the same issue as #1696 with the reviewdog action failing due to GitHub's new diff size limit. This is impacting our large PR workflows severely. Any known workarounds or planned updates to address this?

Appreciate your efforts on reviewdog.

Thanks.

atiqueakhtar · 2024-03-27T04:45:38Z

Hi @reidab @chrisdp Did you find any workaround for this issue?

danielrbradley · 2024-03-27T09:58:03Z

Related issue:

Fails when too many files changed action-actionlint#104

haya14busa · 2024-03-27T17:16:26Z

Does anyone provide feedback to GitHub?

chrisdp · 2024-03-28T18:00:11Z

No work around yet. Might have to remove reviewdog from our flows if some solution isn't found.

massongit · 2024-03-29T01:22:57Z

https://github.com/massongit/action-golangci-lint/actions/runs/8465852986/job/23193377688?pr=2

  reviewdog: post failed for golangci: fail to parse diff: GET https://api.github.com/repos/massongit/action-golangci-lint/pulls/2: 406 Sorry, the diff exceeded the maximum number of files (300). Consider using 'List pull requests files' API or locally cloning the repository instead. [{Resource:PullRequest Field:diff Code:too_large Message:}]

If your pull requests have a large number of files as above, you may be able to use the list pull requests files API ( https://docs.github.com/en/rest/pulls/pulls?apiVersion=2022-11-28#list-pull-requests-files ) instead of the get a pull request API.

reidab · 2024-03-30T18:12:28Z

It seems possible to work around this using the PR files API in many cases, but it's not a drop-in replacement. The files JSON response still returns the patch text, but it's not in the same multi-file format that the other endpoint returns. The docs claim that the files API can return results in the same application/vnd.github.diff format as the base PR API, but this doesn't seem to actually work. Setting Accept: application/vnd.github.diff still seems to return JSON. I have an inquiry in to GitHub support about whether this is a bug or if the docs are wrong.

Is there a reason that we need to be fetching this diff from GitHub instead of just using git to generate it locally from the repo? Is there an existing DiffService that already does this that we could use as fallback?

derekperkins · 2024-04-16T17:37:48Z

This hasn't resolved the issue for us in GitHub Actions.

time=2024-04-16T17:24:53.361Z level=INFO msg="fallback to use git command"
reviewdog: fail to get diff: failed to get merge-base commit: exit status 128

I'm guessing this has something to do with the shallow clone it does at checkout. Do we need to fetch head with git beforehand?

/usr/bin/git -c protocol.version=2 fetch --no-tags --prune --no-recurse-submodules --depth=1 origin +71ca3938e27ea342224c721a0bfdd16db4e908d6:refs/remotes/pull/4248/merge

dannyskoog · 2024-04-16T17:48:53Z

This hasn't resolved the issue for us in GitHub Actions.
time=2024-04-16T17:24:53.361Z level=INFO msg="fallback to use git command"

reviewdog: fail to get diff: failed to get merge-base commit: exit status 128
I'm guessing this has something to do with the shallow clone it does at checkout. Do we need to fetch head with git beforehand?
/usr/bin/git -c protocol.version=2 fetch --no-tags --prune --no-recurse-submodules --depth=1 origin +71ca3938e27ea342224c721a0bfdd16db4e908d6:refs/remotes/pull/4248/merge

Same here. After the patch we started to face this other issue.

In our case we had to adjust the Git checkout command in our GitHub action job to use a fetch depth of 0 (as opposed to the default of 1).

derekperkins · 2024-04-16T20:59:57Z

While setting fetch-depth: 0 did solve this specific issue, it caused other problems like running out of disk space, taking 10 minutes to clone, etc. It's also not ideal that every GitHub user will have to update their checkout rather than this fallback working by default.

I'm not a git expert, but it seems that if we did a fetch like this, using GitHub default env vars, the necessary branch would be available for the subsequent git merge-base command. Thoughts?

/usr/bin/git -c protocol.version=2 fetch --no-tags --prune --no-recurse-submodules --depth=1 $GITHUB_HEAD_REF

https://docs.github.com/en/actions/learn-github-actions/variables#default-environment-variables

dprotaso · 2024-04-23T15:09:25Z

Do the related actions need bumping ?

eg. reviewdog/action-shellcheck etc?

skonto · 2024-04-24T11:20:35Z

@dprotaso it seems that some are on the right version https://github.com/reviewdog/action-yamllint/blob/master/Dockerfile#L3, others not https://github.com/reviewdog/action-shellcheck/blob/master/action.yml#L63.
Even with 0.17.4 it seems things are not fixed for us, probably hitting the repository limits (20K lines).

derekperkins · 2024-04-24T12:49:11Z

@massongit thanks for the two PRs! It's working great for us now

dprotaso · 2024-04-24T13:01:25Z

Yeah it's still happening - do folks have any suggestions here?

reviewdog: post failed for woke: fail to parse diff: GET https://api.github.com/repos/knative/serving/pulls/15066: 406 Sorry, the diff exceeded the maximum number of lines (20000) [{Resource:PullRequest Field:diff Code:too_large Message:}]

massongit · 2024-04-25T14:38:37Z

Currently, this issue is only resolved when the reporter is github-pr-review.
Therefore, I think that github-check, github-pr-check and github-pr-annotations also need to be resolved.

- [x] depends on: reviewdog/action-suggester#52 This reverts #12280 after the upstream fix reviewdog/reviewdog#1696 has propagated to reviewdog/action-suggester@v1. This should happen when https://github.com/reviewdog/action-suggester/releases has a release that uses [v0.17.4](https://github.com/reviewdog/reviewdog/releases/tag/v0.17.4) or higher. When this happens, rebase this pull request and re-trigger to see that it doesn't fail with the 300 dummy files. Then remove the dummy files and merge this pull request. Co-authored-by: Moritz Firsching <firsching@google.com>

ademidoff mentioned this issue Mar 28, 2024

PMM-12913 Migrate api endpoints to REST percona/pmm#2880

Open

skonto mentioned this issue Mar 29, 2024

Integrate net-certmanager in Serving knative/serving#15066

Merged

massongit mentioned this issue Mar 31, 2024

Add a fallback to git diff command to get diff of a GitHub pull request #1697

Merged

1 task

narutox900 mentioned this issue Apr 4, 2024

[BUG] GitHub API request fails for PR with > 300 files change danger/danger-js#1432

Closed

brotich mentioned this issue Apr 9, 2024

BUG: possible issue with the tool on github repos with a large diff canonical/Inclusive-naming#16

Open

haya14busa closed this as completed in #1697 Apr 13, 2024

massongit mentioned this issue Apr 17, 2024

Fix fallback to git diff command #1714

Merged

1 task

massongit reopened this Apr 17, 2024

haya14busa closed this as completed in #1714 Apr 19, 2024

ghaiszaher mentioned this issue Apr 19, 2024

Ktlint job fails on PRs with > 300 files. ScaCap/action-ktlint#52

Open

mo271 mentioned this issue Apr 20, 2024

[Merged by Bors] - chore: remove temporary reviewdog fix leanprover-community/mathlib4#12284

Closed

1 task

ghaiszaher mentioned this issue Apr 22, 2024

GH-52: upgrade reviewdog to latest version ScaCap/action-ktlint#53

Merged

matsuu mentioned this issue Apr 24, 2024

bump reviewdog v0.17.4 shogo82148/actions-cfn-lint#551

Merged

massongit reopened this Apr 25, 2024

massongit linked a pull request Apr 25, 2024 that will close this issue

Add a fallback to git diff command to get diff of a GitHub pull request on doghouse #1722

Open

1 task

colatkinson mentioned this issue Apr 25, 2024

Action fails with "fail to parse diff" error if PR touches more than 300 files. reviewdog/action-actionlint#124

Open

Taewan-P mentioned this issue May 1, 2024

Major Refactoring BusHanyang/hybus-genesis#85

Merged

6 tasks

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

GitHub Pull Request diff API responds with 406 — diff too large #1696

GitHub Pull Request diff API responds with 406 — diff too large #1696

reidab commented Mar 25, 2024 •

edited

chrisdp commented Mar 25, 2024

atiqueakhtar commented Mar 26, 2024

atiqueakhtar commented Mar 27, 2024

danielrbradley commented Mar 27, 2024

haya14busa commented Mar 27, 2024

chrisdp commented Mar 28, 2024

massongit commented Mar 29, 2024 •

edited

reidab commented Mar 30, 2024

derekperkins commented Apr 16, 2024

dannyskoog commented Apr 16, 2024

derekperkins commented Apr 16, 2024

dprotaso commented Apr 23, 2024

skonto commented Apr 24, 2024 •

edited

derekperkins commented Apr 24, 2024

dprotaso commented Apr 24, 2024

massongit commented Apr 25, 2024

GitHub Pull Request diff API responds with 406 — diff too large #1696

GitHub Pull Request diff API responds with 406 — diff too large #1696

Comments

reidab commented Mar 25, 2024 • edited

chrisdp commented Mar 25, 2024

atiqueakhtar commented Mar 26, 2024

atiqueakhtar commented Mar 27, 2024

danielrbradley commented Mar 27, 2024

haya14busa commented Mar 27, 2024

chrisdp commented Mar 28, 2024

massongit commented Mar 29, 2024 • edited

reidab commented Mar 30, 2024

derekperkins commented Apr 16, 2024

dannyskoog commented Apr 16, 2024

derekperkins commented Apr 16, 2024

dprotaso commented Apr 23, 2024

skonto commented Apr 24, 2024 • edited

derekperkins commented Apr 24, 2024

dprotaso commented Apr 24, 2024

massongit commented Apr 25, 2024

reidab commented Mar 25, 2024 •

edited

massongit commented Mar 29, 2024 •

edited

skonto commented Apr 24, 2024 •

edited