3 ms·
> ""No response received from server XYZ after N seconds" is both more accurate and more informative." Like those news articles which breathlessly report "nobo
by jodrellblank 4y ago
> ""No response received from server XYZ after N seconds" is both more accurate and more informative."
Like those news articles which breathlessly report "nobody from the company was immediately available for comment" as if that was as interesting or relevant as a comment would have been. It isn't. Wait a couple of minutes and call them back, then report what they said. Imagine you call Comcast callcenter about your account and the conversation goes:
You: "I ordered xyz deal it but I'm still seeing the old price, can you help?"
Employee: "Sure, will you hold while I check that on the computer?"
You: "Yeah, ok"
pause
Employee: "No response received from computer after 15 seconds. Click {hangs up} bzzzzzzzzzzzz".
You: "that was accurate and informative, thumbs up"
- HelloNurse 4y agoI'd add that it's obviously the client software's job to decide what timeouts (and what behind-the-scenes retries and fallbacks) are appropriate, and when a timely response has arrived or not. The end user doesn't need to know whether, say, waiting 15 seconds is sufficiently generous: there are software engineers for that.