0001601: Stopping update check in case of server is busy/connection troubles

(0000865)
poutnikg (reporter)
2012-06-11 22:22
edited on: 2012-06-11 22:23

Hm, funny, now I performed Check and in the half appeared
( for the first time ever for me ) message

Server timeout, please try later.

But it seems does not cover all failing scenarios,
like silent timeouts foor every item.

(0000872)
Kyle_Katarn (administrator)
2012-06-16 22:51

It should not loop (fails once and stops)
Please post log + screenshot.

(0000875)
poutnikg (reporter)
2012-06-16 22:58
edited on: 2012-06-16 22:59

Hm, I have to wait to kcsoftware not responsive. :-)
Like if it knew what we talk about, it works like a charm.

(0000877)
Kyle_Katarn (administrator)
2012-06-16 23:11

Lol, thanks :)

I've been working on server scripts today in order to improve the situation of the past week with lots of server performance troubles ...

(0000878)
poutnikg (reporter)
2012-06-16 23:13

Side question,

what if a kind of batch query
would have better overall performance
than querying item per item, as seen in the log ?

(0000882)
Kyle_Katarn (administrator)
2012-06-17 09:16

Sure but would significantly change the server/client architecture.
Maybe for SUMo v4 :)

(0000889)
poutnikg (reporter)
2012-06-19 14:50

Today a while ago I have tried Check at "Master server online SLOW" status.
There was about 90 apps, checking was in fact quite fast, with some 3-4 short 1/2-1s ( guess) pauses.

No issue... :)

(0000890)
Kyle_Katarn (administrator)
2012-06-19 21:03

Server SLOW not **ALWAYS** mean that request will take more time. But it is an indication based on simple HTTP request time

(0000891)
poutnikg (reporter)
2012-06-20 06:47

I see. I have just taken it as a higher probability of success of failure. :-)

(0000892)
Kyle_Katarn (administrator)
2012-06-20 22:30

Right :)

(0000905)
poutnikg (reporter)
2012-06-26 21:05
edited on: 2012-06-26 21:07

Screesnhot here http://img812.imageshack.us/img812/6854/snap208w.png [^]
sumo.log attached as a file.

There were 3 not fully successful updates.
the middle one with stop user cancelling, the first and last uuto cancelled by SUMO with "Server timeout, please try later.

Part of not updated info update seems to be deleted.

(0000907)
Kyle_Katarn (administrator)
2012-06-26 22:33

Thanks

Issue History
Date Modified	Username	Field	Change
2012-06-11 22:13	poutnikg	New Issue
2012-06-11 22:22	poutnikg	Note Added: 0000865
2012-06-11 22:22	poutnikg	Note Edited: 0000865	View Revisions
2012-06-11 22:23	poutnikg	Note Edited: 0000865	View Revisions
2012-06-12 07:31	poutnikg	Tag Attached: check
2012-06-12 07:31	poutnikg	Tag Attached: time out
2012-06-12 21:57	Kyle_Katarn	Assigned To	=> Kyle_Katarn
2012-06-12 21:57	Kyle_Katarn	Status	new => acknowledged
2012-06-16 22:51	Kyle_Katarn	Note Added: 0000872
2012-06-16 22:51	Kyle_Katarn	Status	acknowledged => feedback
2012-06-16 22:58	poutnikg	Note Added: 0000875
2012-06-16 22:58	poutnikg	Status	feedback => assigned
2012-06-16 22:59	poutnikg	Note Edited: 0000875	View Revisions
2012-06-16 23:11	Kyle_Katarn	Note Added: 0000877
2012-06-16 23:13	poutnikg	Note Added: 0000878
2012-06-17 09:16	Kyle_Katarn	Note Added: 0000882
2012-06-19 14:50	poutnikg	Note Added: 0000889
2012-06-19 21:03	Kyle_Katarn	Note Added: 0000890
2012-06-20 06:47	poutnikg	Note Added: 0000891
2012-06-20 22:30	Kyle_Katarn	Note Added: 0000892
2012-06-26 21:05	poutnikg	Note Added: 0000905
2012-06-26 21:07	poutnikg	Note Edited: 0000905	View Revisions
2012-06-26 22:33	Kyle_Katarn	Note Added: 0000907
2012-06-28 22:50	Kyle_Katarn	Relationship added	related to 0001604
2012-06-28 22:50	Kyle_Katarn	Status	assigned => acknowledged

Notes
(0000865) poutnikg (reporter) 2012-06-11 22:22 edited on: 2012-06-11 22:23	Hm, funny, now I performed Check and in the half appeared ( for the first time ever for me ) message Server timeout, please try later. But it seems does not cover all failing scenarios, like silent timeouts foor every item.

(0000872) Kyle_Katarn (administrator) 2012-06-16 22:51	It should not loop (fails once and stops) Please post log + screenshot.

(0000875) poutnikg (reporter) 2012-06-16 22:58 edited on: 2012-06-16 22:59	Hm, I have to wait to kcsoftware not responsive. :-) Like if it knew what we talk about, it works like a charm.

(0000877) Kyle_Katarn (administrator) 2012-06-16 23:11	Lol, thanks :) I've been working on server scripts today in order to improve the situation of the past week with lots of server performance troubles ...

(0000878) poutnikg (reporter) 2012-06-16 23:13	Side question, what if a kind of batch query would have better overall performance than querying item per item, as seen in the log ?

(0000882) Kyle_Katarn (administrator) 2012-06-17 09:16	Sure but would significantly change the server/client architecture. Maybe for SUMo v4 :)

(0000889) poutnikg (reporter) 2012-06-19 14:50	Today a while ago I have tried Check at "Master server online SLOW" status. There was about 90 apps, checking was in fact quite fast, with some 3-4 short 1/2-1s ( guess) pauses. No issue... :)

(0000890) Kyle_Katarn (administrator) 2012-06-19 21:03	Server SLOW not ALWAYS mean that request will take more time. But it is an indication based on simple HTTP request time

(0000891) poutnikg (reporter) 2012-06-20 06:47	I see. I have just taken it as a higher probability of success of failure. :-)

(0000892) Kyle_Katarn (administrator) 2012-06-20 22:30	Right :)

(0000905) poutnikg (reporter) 2012-06-26 21:05 edited on: 2012-06-26 21:07	Screesnhot here http://img812.imageshack.us/img812/6854/snap208w.png [^] sumo.log attached as a file. There were 3 not fully successful updates. the middle one with stop user cancelling, the first and last uuto cancelled by SUMO with "Server timeout, please try later. Part of not updated info update seems to be deleted.

(0000907) Kyle_Katarn (administrator) 2012-06-26 22:33	Thanks