docs: Document retry behavior and how to tune it

[AdrianCurtin]

Issue

No issue. The adapter's behavior on throttled and failed requests is currently undocumented, so an operator hitting 503 SlowDown has no indication that anything is configurable.

Approach

Adds a Retry Behavior section covering what the adapter actually does, which is to configure nothing and inherit the AWS SDK defaults, and where the knobs are.

Everything stated was measured against a server returning 503 SlowDown rather than taken from the SDK docs:

PutObject  -> attempts=3  elapsed=1262ms  name=SlowDown  status=503
HeadBucket -> attempts=3  elapsed=89ms    name=Unknown   status=503

Content:

• Defaults are 3 attempts in standard mode with exponential backoff and jitter. Retryable responses include throttling, 500, 502, 503, 504, and transient network errors. After the attempts are exhausted the error reaches Parse Server, which reports a generic FILE_SAVE_ERROR, so the real cause is only in the server log.
• The first upload from an adapter instance also issues a HeadBucket, cached on the instance afterwards. A throttled response there fails the upload before any object data is sent, and it is logged without an error code, because a HEAD response carries no body for the SDK to parse one from. Both are worth knowing when reading logs from a throttled deployment.
• Retry settings pass through s3overrides to the client, verified for maxAttempts and retryMode.
• When throttling is sustained rather than a spike, raising maxAttempts makes it worse, since every client retries at the same pace. retryMode: "adaptive" is the relevant setting because it rate limits outgoing requests rather than just retrying them. Points at the AWS guidance on prefixes and request rates.

Documentation only. No behavior change, no source touched.

[parse-github-assistant]

🚀 Thanks for opening this pull request! We appreciate your effort in improving the project. Please let us know once your pull request is ready for review.

Tip

• Keep pull requests small. Large PRs will be rejected. Break complex features into smaller, incremental PRs.
• Use Test Driven Development. Write failing tests before implementing functionality. Ensure tests pass.
• Group code into logical blocks. Add a short comment before each block to explain its purpose.
• We offer conceptual guidance. Coding is up to you. PRs must be merge-ready for human review.
• Our review focuses on concept, not quality. PRs with code issues will be rejected. Use an AI agent.
• Human review time is precious. Avoid review ping-pong. Inspect and test your AI-generated code.

Note

Please respond to review comments from AI agents just like you would to comments from a human reviewer. Let the reviewer resolve their own comments, unless they have reviewed and accepted your commit, or agreed with your explanation for why the feedback was incorrect.

Caution

Pull requests must be written using an AI agent with human supervision. Pull requests written entirely by a human will likely be rejected, because of lower code quality, higher review effort and the higher risk of introducing bugs. Please note that AI review comments on this pull request alone do not satisfy this requirement. Our CI and AI review are safeguards, not development tools. If many issues are flagged, rethink your development approach. Invest more effort in planning and design rather than using review cycles to fix low-quality code.

[coderabbitai]

Warning

Review limit reached

@AdrianCurtin, you've reached your PR review limit, so we couldn't start this review.

Next review available in: 21 minutes

You've used all free OSS reviews for now. Wait for the free limit to reset to keep reviewing this public repository.

How can I continue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews.

How do review limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability.

For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window.

Please refer docs for additional details.

Review details

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: a9fa2915-95e6-4748-9bea-8cadc677213d

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between b9245cb and 070e8ab.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• README.md

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}