Skip to content

docs: clarify usage of SkipThrottle decorator with named throttlers #2372

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

kimurraaa
Copy link

@kimurraaa kimurraaa commented Jun 6, 2025

Clarifies that @SkipThrottle() and @Throttle() decorators require explicit throttler names when using named throttler configurations.

PR Checklist

  • The commit message follows our guidelines
  • Tests for the changes have been added (for bug fixes / features)
  • Docs have been added / updated (for bug fixes / features)

PR Type

  • Other: Documentation improvement

What is the current behavior?

The documentation doesn't clearly explain that @SkipThrottle() without parameters doesn't work with named throttlers, leading to silent failures where rate limiting isn't actually skipped.

What is the new behavior?

Added clear documentation sections explaining:

  • When and how to use decorators with named throttlers
  • Examples of correct vs incorrect usage
  • Updated migration guide with concrete examples

Does this PR introduce a breaking change?

  • No

Documentation-only change that clarifies existing behavior.

Other information

This addresses a common confusion where developers expect @SkipThrottle() to work universally, but it requires @SkipThrottle({ throttlerName: true }) syntax with named throttlers.

Explicitly documents the requirement to specify throttler names when using @SkipThrottle @Throttle decorator with named configurations.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant