This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 896 - "summary mode" can cause browser timeout
Summary: "summary mode" can cause browser timeout
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: LinkChecker
Classification: Unclassified
Component: checklink (show other bugs)
Version: 4.0
Hardware: Other other
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: 4.1
Assignee: Olivier Thereaux
QA Contact: qa-dev tracking
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2004-09-28 13:13 UTC by Olivier Thereaux
Modified: 2004-11-23 20:14 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:


Attachments

Description Olivier Thereaux 2004-09-28 13:13:47 UTC
The "summary only" mode sends no output while processing all the links. Given how this phase can 
take up to minutes, some browsers consider it as a "server timeout".

Issue already discussed in 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-qa-dev/2004Sep/0091.html
but no obvious solution found yet.
Comment 1 Ville Skyttä 2004-10-12 21:57:44 UTC
Candidate fix in CVS:
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/perl/modules/W3C/LinkChecker/bin/checklink.diff?r1=4.7&r2=4.8&f=h

As discussed in today's meeting, reassigning to Olivier for the "this may take
some time" message in summary only mode (probably good to have for both cmdline
and CGI).
Comment 2 Olivier Thereaux 2004-11-11 03:56:20 UTC
Will take care of the "this may take some time" message, accepting assignment
 
Comment 3 Olivier Thereaux 2004-11-11 06:49:50 UTC
"this may take some time" message added.

A few tests revealed that although most browsers react well to the 'print spaces' hack, others don't. 
Notably, Mac OSX's safari doesn't even start rendering the page (and thus does not show the "this may 
take some time" message) before, apparently, having received "enough" content, and thus fails with a 
timeout error.

Arguably, this is a browser bug, and there is little we can do about it beyond mentioning in the 
documentation that with some browsers, it is safer to not use the "summary only" option... 

Your thoughts?
Comment 4 Ville Skyttä 2004-11-12 20:05:29 UTC
Ok, let's just document it now and get 4.1 out, and keep eyes open for better
implementations/workarounds in the future.
Comment 5 Ville Skyttä 2004-11-23 20:14:52 UTC
Comment 3 noted in the docs.