On Mar 27, 2014 2:25 AM, "Ian Booth" <email address hidden> wrote:
>
> No argument there at all. But we had a very short time to get
> *something* done before releasing 1.18 and it at least allows manual
> intervention where required. This is not the end of it - more will be
> done but there's a lot of caveats to consider and we need to make sure
> we don't make the problem worse when retrying. Hence the cautious,
> inrcemental approach.
How about being less aggressive towards the service? Something changed in
this area in 1.17.x when compared to 1.16.x. I just can't use 1.17.x with
aws, for example, this is triggered every time. Retrying won't cut down the
aggressiveness, and might even get one banned I figure.
On Mar 27, 2014 2:25 AM, "Ian Booth" <email address hidden> wrote:
>
> No argument there at all. But we had a very short time to get
> *something* done before releasing 1.18 and it at least allows manual
> intervention where required. This is not the end of it - more will be
> done but there's a lot of caveats to consider and we need to make sure
> we don't make the problem worse when retrying. Hence the cautious,
> inrcemental approach.
How about being less aggressive towards the service? Something changed in
this area in 1.17.x when compared to 1.16.x. I just can't use 1.17.x with
aws, for example, this is triggered every time. Retrying won't cut down the
aggressiveness, and might even get one banned I figure.
Would this be better served as another bug?