Hello Armando, Could you please log a bug for this issue? http://bugs.cherokee-project.com/
It's kind of shameful that the web interface backend could take that long to render a regular page, actually. That's definitely something we ought to check out (for the greater good). Even if executing cherokee-admin on a Pentium 100Mhz is not the most common use-case nowadays, it's clear that there must be something to optimize in there. Thanks! On 08/02/2011, at 00:32, Armando Camarero wrote: > Stopping all services in the machine (bind, Exim and courier-imap) I managed > to use all pages except General, which seems to take around 30 s to be > generated. > > Seeing that the interface is usable -although slow- (except for that page) > even with a server so old, maybe it doesn't make any sense raising the limit. > I suppose that even the slowest embedded devices of today are faster than my > 'classic' Pentium. > > Thanks for your help! > > On 07/02/2011 22:33, Alvaro Lopez Ortega wrote: >> Hello there, >> >> On 07/02/2011, at 20:00, Armando Camarero wrote: >> >>> Is there any way to increase the time cherokee waits for the >>> cherokee-admin scripts to return? Google didn't give any useful result on >>> this. >> The timeout is currently set to 25 seconds. >> >> >> http://svn.cherokee-project.com/blame.php?repname=Cherokee&path=%2Fcherokee%2Ftrunk%2Fcherokee%2Fmain_admin.c >> >> Is 25 seconds actually too low? In case it were, I don't think that raising >> it would make any good. Even if it worked in that way, cherokee-admin would >> be just plain unusable. It's kind of weird, though - most of the pages do >> not even require a second to be rendered on a low-end desktop computer. >> >> -- >> Octality >> http://www.octality.com/ >> > -- Octality http://www.octality.com/ _______________________________________________ Cherokee mailing list [email protected] http://lists.octality.com/listinfo/cherokee
