pan-users
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Pan-users] Pan downloads few images at at time


From: Jim Henderson
Subject: Re: [Pan-users] Pan downloads few images at at time
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 19:08:45 +0000 (UTC)
User-agent: Pan/0.141 (Tarzan's Death; GIT 194f2dc git.gnome.org/pan2)

On Wed, 01 Mar 2017 04:02:14 +0000, Duncan wrote:

> Jim Henderson posted on Tue, 28 Feb 2017 17:28:20 +0000 as excerpted:
> 
>> On Tue, 28 Feb 2017 01:55:16 +0000, Duncan wrote:
>> 
>>> Is anything showing up in the log (the status icon to the bottom right
>>> should be clickable)?  What NSP (new-service-provider)?  Maybe they
>>> have some cap on data or time limit per download/connection?
>> 
>> Pan has a hardcoded limit of 4 connections per server - part of GNKSA
>> as I recall.  I imagine it's using 3 connections for downloads, and one
>> for something else (or maybe the OP's config just has 3 set).
>> 
>> IIRC, it can be increased by modifying the server.xml file directly,
>> but the UI is coded to limit it to restrict concurrent connections in
>> accordance with GNKSA.
> 
> I thought about that, but as I read the report at least, number of
> connections at once shouldn't have anything to do with the problem.
> 
> Because if it was number of connections, pan might only download three
> things at once, but as they finished with the first downloads they'd
> continue with additional downloads in the queue as expected.
> 
> Either that or if the connections were somehow going stale, due to too
> many dropped packets say, manually telling pan to download more after
> the first set had finished wouldn't do anything either, as the existing
> connections would still be stuck, and it does, so it doesn't appear to
> be existing connections going stale and a limit of four connections
> preventing new connections from being established.
> 
> So I don't see how it could be related to pan's default limit of four
> connections per server.  The symptoms simply don't fit that scenario,
> unless there's an additional piece to the puzzle like the weird server
> behavior and/or possibly logged errors I suggested.

Ah, yes, I see what you're saying.  On a re-read, I see what you see now.

Jim

-- 
 Jim Henderson
 Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]