If 1 sec works why not use 1 sec? If it doesn't, use 2 secs.
There is no reason to reduce the refresh rate that I can see. And yes, we should keep trying forever, unless either: - We are configured to run out of retries, and we run out of retries. (We don't have to ...) - We load the page - We get an error IMHO this will allow us to turn off the 2MB file size limit, this is one of the big gains here, but it means it could be fetching for some time. On Saturday 13 December 2008 01:23, Juiceman wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 10:21 AM, Zero3 wrote: > > Matthew Toseland skrev: > >> On Friday 12 December 2008 09:55, David 'Bombe' Roden wrote: > >> > >>> On Thursday 11 December 2008 22:53:54 Tommy[D] wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>> If those users without javascript have no big disadvantages, this is ok > >>>> > >> for > >> > >>>> me. > >>>> > >>> We wouldn't need JavaScript at all. A simple http-refresh would suffice. > >>> Reload the page in 10, 20, 40, 90 seconds and if the data is there, show it, > >>> otherwise just show the page again. > >>> > >> > >> Except that in many cases it will load in less than 10 seconds and therefore > >> we have significantly reduced the performance of the node. IMHO we need a > >> 1-second refresh; whether this is attainable is an open question. OTOH with > >> javascript we could refresh in real time and not cost any significant > >> performance. > >> > > > > 1-second HTTP refreshes won't be a good idea if the node is not on LAN > > :-/. Javascript is probably better then. > > > > - Zero3 > > _______________________________________________ > > Devl mailing list > > Devl at freenetproject.org > > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl > > > > I don't want to run javascript. :( > > Would it be possible for it to refresh in increasing increments? e.g. > 1 sec, 2 secs, 3 secs, 4 ... until the whole thing is loaded? That > way the images that will load quickly will show up quickly and the > ones that take 30 secs will show up will still show close to the time > they would have anyways without hammering the node/browser. > > 1 > 2 3 > 3 6 > 4 10 > 5 15 > 6 21 > 7 28 > 8 36 > 9 45 > 10 55 > 11 66 > > After 7 refreshes we would have spent ~30 secs. It's getting pretty > long in between after that... Maybe cap it at 5 secs? > > 1 > 2 3 > 3 6 > 4 10 > 5 15 > 5 20 > 5 25 > 5 30 > 5 35 > 5 40 > > 8 refreshes to get to 30 secs. Images that take more than 15 secs to > load would come in more responsive in this method. I imagine we > wouldn't want to refresh forever, would we? Stop auto-refreshing > after several minutes? > > > -- > I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the > death, your right to say it. - Voltaire > Those who would give up Liberty, to purchase temporary Safety, deserve > neither Liberty nor Safety. - Ben Franklin > > > _______________________________________________ > Devl mailing list > Devl at freenetproject.org > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 827 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20081213/4964f2e5/attachment.pgp>
