Comment 9 for bug 114356

(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> <snip>
> > There's still at least one
> > once-per-second timer left that also wants fixing; but the 100ms one is a good
> > start to get fixed soon.
>
> So not quite fixed yet, reopening.

From upstream:
Patch merged against 1.2.x and 1.3.x sources. I agree with changing the
100ms timer, but I do not with the second 1000ms which is only called
rarely (after HTTP errors) to allow 3 retries per request. So it is not
continuous timer and should cause not much load.