## Do not Separate Schemas

Now, there are some cases where you might want to have the **same schema for input and output**.

Probably the main use case for this is if you already have some autogenerated client code/SDKs and you don't want to update all the autogenerated client code/SDKs yet, you probably will want to do it at some point, but maybe not right now.

	if err == io.EOF { // Verify content SHA256, if set.
		if r.expectedMin > 0 {
			if r.bytesRead < r.expectedMin {
				return 0, SizeTooSmall{Want: r.expectedMin, Got: r.bytesRead}
			}
		}
		if r.expectedMax > 0 {
			if r.bytesRead > r.expectedMax {
				return 0, SizeTooLarge{Want: r.expectedMax, Got: r.bytesRead}
			}
		}

		if r.sha256 != nil {
			if sum := r.sha256.Sum(nil); !bytes.Equal(r.contentSHA256, sum) {

<div class="screenshot">
<img src="/img/tutorial/header-param-models/image01.png">
</div>

## Forbid Extra Headers

In some special use cases (probably not very common), you might want to **restrict** the headers that you want to receive.

You can use Pydantic's model configuration to `forbid` any `extra` fields:

//// tab | Python 3.10+

```Python hl_lines="10"

<div class="screenshot">
<img src="/img/tutorial/query-param-models/image01.png">
</div>

## Forbid Extra Query Parameters

In some special use cases (probably not very common), you might want to **restrict** the query parameters that you want to receive.

You can use Pydantic's model configuration to `forbid` any `extra` fields:

//// tab | Python 3.10+

```Python hl_lines="10"

## Decision

The *Build Tool Team* has decided to use Architectural Decision Records (aka ADR) to track decisions we want to follow.

The main logic with ADRs is to describe (architectural) decisions made:

* To provide best practices and solutions we (as the *build tool* team) want to promote.
* To avoid asking the same thing multiple times during code review.

### One Process per Container

In this type of scenario, you probably would want to have **a single (Uvicorn) process per container**, as you would already be handling replication at the cluster level.

So, in this case, you **would not** want to have a multiple workers in the container, for example with the `--workers` command line option.You would want to have just a **single Uvicorn process** per container (but probably multiple containers).

# the folder instead of the venv package.
# 
# Pass --config=pip to run the same suite of tests. If you want to run just one
# test for investigation, you'll need --config=pip_venv instead, and then you
# can specify whichever target you want.
test:pip_venv --action_env PYTHON_BIN_PATH="/bazel_pip/bin/python3"
test:pip_venv --action_env PYTHON_LIB_PATH="/bazel_pip/lib/python3/site-packages"

func bitrotVerify(r io.Reader, wantSize, partSize int64, algo BitrotAlgorithm, want []byte, shardSize int64) error {
	if algo != HighwayHash256S {
		h := algo.New()
		if n, err := io.Copy(h, r); err != nil || n != wantSize {
			// Premature failure in reading the object, file is corrupt.
			return errFileCorrupt
		}
		if !bytes.Equal(h.Sum(nil), want) {
			return errFileCorrupt
		}
		return nil
	}

			t.Errorf("Test %d: filtered headers do not match expected headers - got: %v , want: %v", i, test.Header, test.ExpectedHeader)
		}
		RemoveSensitiveEntries(metadata)
		if !areKeysEqual(test.ExpectedHeader, metadata) {
			t.Errorf("Test %d: filtered headers do not match expected headers - got: %v , want: %v", i, test.Header, test.ExpectedHeader)
		}
	}

# `HTTPConnection` class

When you want to define dependencies that should be compatible with both HTTP and WebSockets, you can define a parameter that takes an `HTTPConnection` instead of a `Request` or a `WebSocket`.

You can import it from `fastapi.requests`:

```python
from fastapi.requests import HTTPConnection
```