This document is written based on the FastGPT v4.17.0 configuration guidelines.
What data for this category looks like
Data for this category comes from customer product models, mold flow or forming simulation files, CAD/CAM design files, machining and measurement data, and sample part inspection records. Data updates are carried out on a per-project basis, and are synchronized after each trial mold or mold modification. Daily produced documents include mold design task sheets, DFM reports, part drawings, machining process cards, trial mold reports, mold modification notices, and mold history. Document fields include the number of mold cavities, demolding angle, forming shrinkage rate, machining tolerances, and other related items.
What constraints do these characteristics impose on the HTTP Interfaces and External Systems link
Data sources include files in multiple formats, so interfaces must support different file types and structured data formats. Update cycles are irregular, so interfaces must support on-demand data pulling to adapt to project, trial mold, and mold modification update rhythms. Single project data volume is large, so the total transmission capacity per interface request must adapt to the combined size of multiple documents. Documents have unique business fields for molds, so interfaces must support custom field mapping to match business requirements. Frequent trial mold and mold modification updates require interfaces to have low-latency response capabilities to ensure real-time synchronization of process documents and exception reports.
How to set configurations
| Configuration Item | Recommended Setting | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
Authorization | Bearer {preset API key} | Complies with HTTP interface authentication specifications, isolating data access permissions for different projects |
variables | {"mold_category":"injection molding","required_docs":["dfm_report","process_card"]} | Passes mold category-specific parameters and specified document types, avoiding reliance on the system's default context splicing logic |
responseData | Return structured process fields and exception records | Filters non-business-related redundant data, adapting to the field format of mold documents |
| Single request timeout | 600 seconds | Adapts to the transmission duration of multiple CAD and simulation files, avoiding timeouts triggered by large file transfers |
| Data pull trigger rule | Triggered by project milestones | Matches the update rhythm of mold design and manufacturing based on projects, trial molds, and mold modifications |
Three Common Misconfigurations
- Phenomenon: The interface does not pass the
variablesparameter, and the system automatically splices historical records as context, resulting in irrelevant historical project data. Cause: Exclusive business parameters were not passed viavariablesas required by the configuration, relying on the system's default context splicing logic. - Phenomenon: The
responseDatareturned by the interface contains a large amount of unstructured CAD file content, leading to excessive processing time. Cause: NoresponseDatafiltering rule was configured, and only structured process and exception fields were not extracted. - Phenomenon: A 504 timeout status code is triggered for a single request, and the interface does not return valid data. Cause: The timeout period was not adjusted to the duration adapted to large file transfers, and the general short timeout configuration was used.
How to confirm the configuration is correct
- Call the configured interface and check whether the returned content only includes preset mold process and exception report related fields.
- Verify the interface request header, confirm that the
Authorizationparameter is configured in accordance with specifications, and no public or universal keys are used. - Trigger an interface call after a trial mold, and check whether the exclusive business parameters of the current project are passed in the
variablesparameter. - Transfer a file package matching the scale of single project data, and confirm that the interface does not trigger abnormal error reports.
The values provided are common starting points and should be measured against the samples used in the actual deployment.