...(or click reload if this page does not refresh automatically in 1366 seconds.

[ankman]

I cannot see this is in discssion here recenntly, so I post.

I'm getting messages like

Please wait - subscribe to remove this delay

(or click reload if this page does not refresh automatically in 1366 seconds.)

since today. Frequent refreshes of the page let's me report earlier.

Is it just me?

[Snowbat]

It's not just you. I'm seeing that a lot in the past couple of hours.

[kmolloy]

It's not just you. I'm seeing that a lot in the past couple of hours.

Are you still seeing it now? I can't replicate it.

[kmolloy]

Are you still seeing it now? I can't replicate it.

Oh, there it is. I'll let sysops know. Thanks!

[ankman]

Oh, there it is. I'll let sysops know. Thanks!

Thanks. Back to normal.

[T.V.]

This issue is not resolved!

I keep getting these messages nearly all the time, and it's more annoying than the spam I try to report...

I've always thought this was a good service, and therefore paid for "membership" for years now, but its starting to be ...#![at]$£... tiresome to report...

I know it can be fixed though.

[Wazoo]

This issue is not resolved!

I haven't seen the huge numbers used in the starting Post. However, I keep running into those that indicate 50+ seconds, usually with a (meta?) refresh that then indicates something like 4 to 10 seconds, with the parse results coming fairly quick after that refreshed screen. I had started doing a listing of the time shown and the psrsing srever that provided the results, but soon came to believe that this wasn't the actual connection that seemed to be involved. I'm more of the thought that the initial screen offers the estimated time based on a server that seems to be really bogged down, but the actual parse may not end up being handled by 'that' server, assumedly (usually) being shunted elsewhere else to a system that's not working so hard. Yet, I have had some that did in fact take over a minute to actually complete. On the other hand, I did make an assumption that Kelly would have been monitoring this, and work was continuing. Perhaps that's a wrog thought?

Based on your Post, removed the "Resolved" tag.

[enigma1]

I haven't seen the thousands of seconds but I also noticed an intermittent behavior sometimes I post the email and there is no delay at all not even the few secs but other times I run up to nearly 100.

In one case I submitted the email it the initial screen was saying 6 secs then it changed to 63 seconds without reloading or anything.

[Farelf]

I'm seeing similar to Wazoo and enigma1 as well.

[truffuls]

I haven't seen the huge numbers used in the starting Post. However, I keep running into those that indicate 50+ seconds, usually with a (meta?) refresh that then indicates something like 4 to 10 seconds, with the parse results coming fairly quick after that refreshed screen.

I've been getting this too, both at work and at home. Many times I refresh the page and the number changes, sometimes higher, sometimes lower. Drives me nuts. It is totally inconsistent. I get a lot of spam that nothing seems to catch, so I always have SpamCop open. This happens to me all day long.

[william_]

I was surprised to see that the manual submission webform now takes 73 seconds to complete, (I hardly ever use the web interface for submission), I thought it worth mentioning since I could not find a mention thus far. It seems like a fairly over the top adjustment, surely the process of manually submitting spam items individually via a webform is grueling enough of an undertaking?

Please wait - subscribe to remove this delay

(or click reload if this page does not refresh automatically in 73 seconds.)

Merged with existing topic

[SpamCopAdmin]

SpamCop appears to me working normally for me. No delay at all in processing web form spam.

- Don D'Minion - SpamCop Admin -

- service[at]admin.spamcop.net -

.

[Wazoo]

SpamCop appears to me working normally for me. No delay at all in processing web form spam.

Out of the last half-dozen ... three popped up a nag screen showing less than 10 seconds

one showed 47 seconds

one showed 6 seconds, then refreshed to show 73 seconds

one popped up showing 93 seconds

Again, I have no idea what the relationship is between the system that provides nag screen estimated time and the specific system that kicks out the parse results. Although nowhere near 'accurate' the 'relative' times do match.

Later Edit: produced by prod-sc-www1

(or click reload if this page does not refresh automatically in 84 seconds.)

Parse Returned was also processed on prod-sc-www1

Running a 700MHz Celeron with but 128M of RAM ... not fast enough to catch the data on one that first showed 6 seconds, then refreshed to 72 seconds ....

[aculver]

For the last 2 days I've been getting this message:

Please wait - subscribe to remove this delay

(or click reload if this page does not refresh automatically in 87 seconds.)

It's usually about a 5-7 second delay, but now it's jumped to about a minute and a half? Are you trying to discourage people from submitting spam? What's going on?

[Farelf]

Last post moved from the lounge and merged with existing topic.

I'm seeing something like 93 seconds delay on most of my first submissions. But only for the first. If I make other submissions within the same session the wait time seems to drop back to the 6 seconds or so as normal. But it is still driving me CRAZY.

[aculver]

Someone above mentioned the meta refresh being only a few seconds despite their message saying some large number. I actually did check the source of the page yesterday and the meta refresh delay was the same as the message (around 90 seconds).

If I hit refresh, the number on the page seems to decrease by about the number of seconds I had waited (eg, if it said 90 and I waited 10 seconds, it would now say 80).

Cheers

[Wazoo]

Someone above mentioned the meta refresh being only a few seconds despite their message saying some large number.

I did toss out the 'meta' ... however, note the use of parenthesis and a question mark, then followed by the meandering dialog about not knowing just how this time was generated as compared to the server(s) involved in actually returning the parse results. Another 'word' I might toss out would be "pushed' if that makes any difference. As above, one nag-screen might toss out 5 seconds and the parse is returned fairly quickly .... the next one might toss out 73 seconds and the parse takes quite a while ..... the confusion I was relating to were those that tossed out one number, but before the parse ws returned, a 'refresh action' occurred and the time variable changed. Some have jumped from <10 to >50, others jumped from >70 to <10, with the actual time between those refresh actions usually occurring within the a few seconds of the first displayed nag-screen, but .... I've had others that were in the reverse, say showing 60+ seconds but after say 25 seconds, refreshing to show 7 seconds.

Issue is definitely intenal to the Cisco/IronPort server farm, seems very strange that it can only be seen by non-paid-staff folks.

[Farelf]

...Issue is definitely intenal to the Cisco/IronPort server farm, seems very strange that it can only be seen by non-paid-staff folks.

Wonder if they're (paid staff) even subject to nag screen handling. If I were a Deputy or Admin, I would like an account just like a paid account, with all the bells and whistles - and no nag screen. But someone full-time should have a "free account", complete with nag screen, to verify function through updates and over time.

[Wazoo]

But someone full-time should have a "free account", complete with nag screen, to verify function through updates and over time.

I was thinking even further up/down/along the chain ... the Cisco/IronPort software engineers. With Kelly's statement that users really are still important, the free-account user experience seems like it should also be under review/test/etc.