[RCD] keep-alive changes

Thomas Bruederli thomas at roundcube.net
Tue May 1 13:49:50 CEST 2012


A.L.E.C wrote:
> Digging into session issues I've found this keep-alive thing a little
> bit overcomplicated and unclear. The keep-alive setting handles two
> things: session keeping and new-mail checking. Some plugins also bind to
> keep-alive to do some recurring actions (e.g. to display calendar
> alarms, etc.).

Right. The keep-alive is replaced in mail by check-recent in order to not
have two independently running requests which may cause race-conditions.
> 
> I think we should split these functionalities. So keep-alive action
> should be used only for session keeping. In such case we need to execute
> keep-alive action only after some inactivity time (e.g. session_lifetime
> - 1min [or 5%]). It means timer should be resetted on every reequest.
> Also it means we don't need a separate config option, because the
> interval would be calculated from session_lifetime. For
> session_lifetime=0 there would be no keep-alive requests.

I agree that two config options are not really necessary. But keep-alive
has to run more frequently than just session_lifetime - 5% because it may
fail due connection problems or the javascript timer simply doesn't fire
(which I eventually see happening when the browser tab is not active).
> 
> Another thing is recurring check for new-mail. This would work as is,
> but... see below.
> 
> Last but not least. We should provide some "global" recurring action
> which would work across all tasks so, plugins could bind to it. One
> "global" action to minimize session race-conditions when few plugins
> will create their own recurring requests on the same time. In mail task
> we could "bind" our check-recent action to this global action.

That's a reasonable suggestion and would certainly make the code clearer.
> 
> In my opinion this would be a much clearer solution and would give as
> some additional possibilities:
> - possibility to disable recurring checks (for new mail etc.) at all,
> - better overall performance because keep-alive out of mail task will be
> executed less frequently

I'm not sure if this would run less frequently. It actually has to run with
the minimum interval of all recurring checks which need to be done.
> 
> I think also, we could rename keep_alive option description ("Check for
> new messages on") into something like "Update system state (check for
> new mail, etc.) on", and move it to User Interface section, so we could
> use it as our global action interval.

"Update system state" is something no user understand but "Check for new
messages" certainly is. However, this is just a label but more important is
that it doesn't set the keep-alive interval (which is to be derived from
session_lifetime) but the actual check-recent inrerval.

I basically agree to you suggestions but let's see if the recent changes
help avoiding the session timeouts before we add more major changes to it.

Regards,
Thomas


More information about the dev mailing list