New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Mentions appear randomly late in the dedicated mentions screen #216
Comments
The logic is here: https://github.com/miguelfreitas/twister-html/blob/master/js/twister_newmsgs.js#L22 I have seen problems too. I guess there is something buggy here. The idea for testing if the (not yet known) mention time is > (lastmentiontime - 1 hour) is to prevent very old mentions which have already been discarded (thus not "known" anymore) from reappearing as "new". But we might just relax on this test and see what happens. |
Of course the other possibility is that the sender may have failed to send/store the mention to the DHT network. In that case, his twisterd will be retrying it every hour. |
In the latter case, it also won't appear in the normal timeline, correct? It does however, so I think the message as such has been propagating properly. |
Not really. Timeline propagation uses "bittorrent", mentions use DHT/UDP. |
Ah, learn something new every day :-) |
:-) check this out http://twister.net.co/?attachment_id=355 |
👍 (was on my reading list already ;-) ) |
asking about status of this issue (after getting link to here on my current problem: |
I think it is worth noting somethings that have changed since this issue was created:
ps: your observations from twister experiences are always very interesting. we should somehow link those (or reorganize into) our own wiki http://wiki.twister.net.co/w/start for documentation purposes. |
When I get mentioned sometimes the notifier on top doesn't show an indicator until much, much later in time.
I've tried to find a pattern, but failed. Sometimes it's after a minute but I have seen it take as long as 4 to 6 hours.
What is the logic here so I can perform a test and give some useful analysis for the issue?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: