Product Ideas

Ability for Prizmdoc Hosted customers to have an option to set their own server request time-out value

As a PrizmDoc hosted customer, there are certain server settings we would like to control such as the request time-out value in case more time is needed to process specific files.

  • Philip Denette
  • Jan 24 2018
  • Will not implement
SLX Ticket# IN-133862
  • Attach files
  • Jack Korabelnikov commented
    22 Mar, 2018 02:51pm

    Mark, thanks for taking another look at this. I have not tried this specific document yet and in light of some other fixes that are coming in PAS 13.2, let's keep this closed. 

    After I retest this with PAS 13.2, and if there is still a problem, we can open another ticket.

    Thanks again!

  • Admin
    Mark Fears commented
    21 Mar, 2018 02:24pm

    Hi Jack,

    I reviewed the issue that you tagged in your response and downloaded the document that you provide which was having the rendering issue. The document rendered and did so within a couple of seconds.

    The dev team implemented a fix which increased the time-out in PDH significantly to resolve this issue.

    Since then we have released updates to PrizmDoc that have dramatically increase performance especially in rendering the first page of a document so the timeout issue should also be minimized.

    If you are still experiencing issues with your documents, could you post samples of those documents to this request?

    Thanks!

    Regards,

    Mark

  • Jack Korabelnikov commented
    20 Mar, 2018 04:10am

    Mark, this makes sense. I probably would have said the same myself.

    However, the original problem remains, which is that some large documents fail to convert due to timeouts (see support issue IN-133720). It's a real problem that continues to happen for us.

    Are there other solutions that can address the problem and not be a stability risk? Maybe make the timeout proportional to document size instead of a flat value?

    Thank you!

  • Admin
    Mark Fears commented
    14 Mar, 2018 01:56pm

    Enabling this has the potential for one user of the system to dominate system resources which would impact all users of the system. We don't allow this to protect users and system availability.

  • +5