#1485360 closed Feature Requests (fixed)
allow to configure keep_alive
| Reported by: | tensor | Owned by: | alec |
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | 5 | Milestone: | 0.2-stable |
| Component: | User Interface | Version: | 0.2-alpha |
| Severity: | minor | Keywords: | |
| Cc: |
Description
Configuration option for keep_alive would be handy.
- it should be possible to allow the user to configure his own keepalive or disable keepalive altogether
- there should be a minimum_keep_alive option with ability to forcibly disable keepalive
- there should be a default_keep_alive option with ability to disable keepalive
- the hardcoded default should probably stay at 60 secs to lifted to 300 secs
Change History (6)
comment:1 Changed 5 years ago by thomasb
- Milestone changed from 0.2-beta to later
comment:2 Changed 5 years ago by tensor
One use case would be to releave the strain from the server. RC bombards the server with a request every 60 seconds, it takes resources. Lifting it to 600 secs would provide some relief.
Some users like to read email only several times a day, not "as it arrives". Giving an ability to check the mail once in 2 hours will help such users to process the mail "in batches".
Enforcing a minimum of keep_alive would prevent the user to set the update interval to 1 sec and slow down the server.
Giving a high default for the user would keep the server strees to a minimum. Having a user configurable keep_alive will allow a user to reduce the delay to an acceptable level if he really wants to check mail often. Having a minimum setting prevents that user from checking mail toooo often to degrade the service for others.
comment:3 Changed 5 years ago by alec
- Milestone changed from later to 0.2-stable
- Owner set to alec
+1
comment:4 Changed 5 years ago by alec
- Resolution set to fixed
- Status changed from new to closed
Done in [95d90f86].
comment:5 Changed 5 years ago by thomasb
Well, I still do not agree that this is something the (average) user should care about.
We really need to separate the important settings from these highly advanced user prefs. I therefore created a new ticket to address that issue: #1485524
comment:6 Changed 5 years ago by alec
So, maybe it should be added to 'dont_override' by default?

I don't see any reason why a user should think about what the heck this setting is good for. Our main goal is to keep the settings form as simple as possible but find reasonable defaults.