rejetto forum

The "Takeback" template - A different & modern taste

NaitLee · 38 · 1641

Poll

Do you prefer HFS to work with a limit set to any type of max connection numbers?

No, I set no limits to that.
1 (100%)
Yes, I limit it to a number that won't cause HFS crash. (over hundred)
0 (0%)
Yes, I limit it to a number that won't slow down my computer. (round 60)
0 (0%)
Yes, I limit it to a number that won't cost too much bandwidth. (round 25)
0 (0%)
Yes, I limit it to a number that is very little (below 10)
0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 1

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline NaitLee

  • Occasional poster
  • *
    • Posts: 76
  • Computer brained boy
    • View Profile
I just noticed that this template is making a lot of settings at install-time, many unnecessary and possibly unwanted by the user, and even more important it seems the user is not warned about them, while he is probably not expecting them.

These settings are also present in Throwback14. They are just inherited.

How about let HFS remember what settings did a template make, and after switching to another template HFS just restore them?
Thanks for noticing me :D , I'm just someone normal like others here :D
But don't forget to check out my template ;P


Offline rejetto

  • Administrator
  • Tireless poster
  • *****
    • Posts: 13271
    • View Profile
These settings are also present in Throwback14. They are just inherited.

i know, but you can decide if you want to remove some of them.
Anyway, it's your template and i'm not telling you what to do, it's only a suggestion.

Quote
How about let HFS remember what settings did a template make, and after switching to another template HFS just restore them?

the installation can make any kind of action not just settings, tracking all of them would be not easy, and some actions would also not be undoable (what if you delete a file).
and if the user makes further changes on its own, the uninstall would end ruining what the user did.
i don't think we'll never see such feature, but surely we don't have it now.


Offline danny

  • Tireless poster
  • ****
    • Posts: 165
    • View Profile
The old settings were to decrease server workload.  However, they need reviewed/tested to see if they are good with HFS2.4. 

If you have image thumbnails, it may be good to add:  {.set item|/|not as download=*.png;*.jpg;*.JPG;*.jpeg;*.gif.} because the thumbnails work faster without logging per each. 

With 2.4 there is a new thing.  Connections and Speed limits make too much work for the server.  So, if there are thumbnails, it is necessary to modify the javascript lazyload so that thumbnails load few/one at a time.  I did a low-hanging-fruit mod for Throwback/2.4 for 509ms between retries; but, perhaps you would have a better idea to support the series-order nature of a single thread server? 


Offline danny

  • Tireless poster
  • ****
    • Posts: 165
    • View Profile
...Last update: 6/17 9pm: 0.15c on GitHub Supports 2.4 RC5...
I tested throwback and Takeback together to see if they have large folder support (despite rough connection). 
For this test I set speed limit of 0.1 and then searched from root for *.*

It took a while.  And, they are successful. 

It was a simulated/artificial test for finding out if more was needed for large folder support.  More recconiter wasn't needed.  Throwback and Takeback delivered really well.  There was nothing else in scope of the test.  That doesn't test everything.  But, the good news is that if you wanted a list of files, it works for any speed of internet connection.


Offline rejetto

  • Administrator
  • Tireless poster
  • *****
    • Posts: 13271
    • View Profile
The old settings were to decrease server workload.  However, they need reviewed/tested to see if they are good with HFS2.4. 

You can decide to let the user if to apply these "extra optimizations".
I updated the documentation for {.dialog.} with an example on how to do that.
https://rejetto.com/wiki/index.php?title=HFS:_scripting_commands#Others

Quote
With 2.4 there is a new thing.  Connections and Speed limits make too much work for the server.  So, if there are thumbnails, it is necessary to modify the javascript lazyload so that thumbnails load few/one at a time. 

2.4 doesn't affect file downloading, and not even ~sections downloading. I don't understand why you put so much '509' code for all of them.

I tested throwback and Takeback together to see if they have large folder support (despite rough connection).  For this test I set speed limit of 0.1 and then searched from root for *.*

if you are interested you may consider using the speed limiter included in Chrome: F12, network, click on the 'online' drop down menu' above.
« Last Edit: June 27, 2020, 09:20:17 AM by rejetto »


Offline danny

  • Tireless poster
  • ****
    • Posts: 165
    • View Profile
... I don't understand why you put so much '509' code for all of them....
NaitLee: "I used a setInterval() in Takeback to load a few images (append an img element) at a time." 
But, I didn't figure that out, so new Throwback does the tiny delays a little differently. 
The purpose is same:
Single thread server with Multiple users. 

If a nonstop stream of images to one user, other users can't get file list, server owner can't use UI. 
However,
If we put in tiny delays between images, other users get the file list and server UI stays alive. 
Also useful for less # requests per second. 

P.S.
After that, NaitLee updated Takeback to a live preview, which is 1 photo a time and works really well on home connections. 
So, the problem does not relate (does not happen) to the current version of Takeback.


Offline rejetto

  • Administrator
  • Tireless poster
  • *****
    • Posts: 13271
    • View Profile
If a nonstop stream of images to one user, other users can't get file list, server owner can't use UI. 

but only file list is limited, images are not, you should not get errors on images.
I browsed a folder with 1200 photos with your tpl, enabled thumbnails, and got no errors, all loaded at first attempt.
I repeated the test while a script was bombing with tens of requests per second on the same address (127.0.0.1), no errors and the photos continued to be downloaded and watched.


Offline danny

  • Tireless poster
  • ****
    • Posts: 165
    • View Profile
The poll is good. 
I think that we should design the template so that it does not have, nor use, nor cause need of limits.