Is there a reason server-side or client-side why uploading even a tiny file via the iframe method can take such a long time?
I'm just trying to upload a file via an iframe so the user doesn't have to leave the page. It all works but it's incredibly slow. Oddly enough, one time in umpteen, it will actually go through quickly. I'm not sure what's going on.
Browser is Firefox 3.6. Server is CentOS 4 with HTTPd 2.0.
My bad, turns out the code I got from elsewhere was submitting using the same form which in this case was very large. It made the browser compile everything for submission just for the upoad. And the server-side process had to decompile all of that on its end, too. Combined, I guess that's why it was slow.
Related
I'm trying to scrape my own banking information by automating the process using Selenium in Ruby.
I'm running into a bizarre situation where performing the exact same sequence in the browser (whether just the normal browser or private/incognito) works fine, but when I try to log in under a Selenium-controlled browser I get back a strange 500 error from the server.
I've noticed the browser console logs also look different in terms of certain logging messages related to cookies, JS errors, libraries being loaded, etc.
I have found an answer on SO mentioning one possible difference in Chrome being a specific "cdc" string that might be detectable, but is there some kind of corresponding difference in Firefox/Geckodriver that could be used to detect the fact that I'm trying to automate the browser?
I'm not really sure where to look, because my understand was that running via Selenium should basically have identical behaviour to running via the browser itself.
Would love some guidance on what mechanisms may be in play to explain the difference in behaviour!
I have a J2EE App and I've been running it for a couple of years...
recently there's chance that whatever page I want to visit, it may show up as just Plain HTML and may not be rendered...
No Logs are written about this behavior as if it's a normal thing...
usually I click to visit a page, the Browser shows some cue about sending the request to the server... I can check that everything works just fine back there... Now there's 2 ways I can see this error :
1. I wait and wait and wait... and the browser is still waiting for a response... If I lose patience and press F5, the page shows up as PlainText HTML.
2. I wait till the end and the Browser may or may not load the page... if it loads the page, it's only partial and some parts of the Javascript or HTML may not load at all.
Pressing F5 usually fixes the problem but after a while, this may happen again...
This used to happen with Tomcat 6.x every once in a while but became worse after using Tomcat 7.x .
at first I thought it's related to my App but then I noticed this pattern happening even in Tomcat's own Admin pages such as its Session Manager.
What can I do ? I'm using Tomcat 7.0.54. upgrading it to newer versions didn't help...
Thank you...
A bit unsure where to look for this one...
Context:
HTML5 web page, that uses HTML5 EventSource / server-side events to get refresh notifications
OpenWrt BarrierBreaker server, running uHTTPd as the web server
a two-level CGI script that provides the server-side events:
the CGI is a shell script (ash, not bash), that parses QUERY_STRING, and calls...
a C application that do the true data extraction (from an SQLite database) and pushes the data to the web page
Everything works, except for a little detail: when the web page is closed,
the C application keeps running. Since it doesn't expect any user input, its current structure is a simple while(1). So after some time, the openwrt box has dozens of copies of the app running.
So the question: how can the application be changed to detect that the client isn't there anymore, and that it should quits?
Thanks
[Edit]
Since posting this a few hours ago, i investigated if the information was somehow available in the script's input stream. It appears it isn't.
I also found http://html5doctor.com/server-sent-events/ that describes a strategy to do exactly this in a Node.js environment, but I have no idea how to translate this in a script-based one.
[/Edit]
I am part of the developer team for a quite a large online system using ASP.NET(4).
Asp.net Ajax completely breaks down for Webkit browsers and we are getting full page postbacks when we should be getting partial only for the UpdatePanels.
I am starting to believe it has something to do with my Application Configuration, mainly for the following reasons.
If I move the ajax enabled controls to a new project they will work as expected for all browsers, including Webkit.
I created a static .aspx file with nothing but an UpdatePanel,ScriptManager and a button making a literal visible on click.
I get no Javascript errors from any browser, and i see an http request for the asp.net-ajax (ScriptResource.axd) in both Firebug and Chrome Developer tools
I tried ye'old safari fix from this highly referenced thread
Edit: After a bit more testing and http sniffing i noticed a major difference between the test application and the actual application. The test application generates 2 additional .axd files which are not generated from the actual application. These WebResource.axd, seem to contain data related to the async postback. However this is only the case for Webkit browsers. The WebResource.axd files are generated for Firefox as i can see them in firebug
What i am asking from the community, is any ideas or suggestions as to what could be the cause of this problem and if i am correct to assume that the problem is probably on the server side
Thanks for any help
The problem was due to a deprecated config file that's used to limit the content that bots/spiders/crawlers receive, which was loading by mistake thanks to our lovely inhouse CMS
In short if u get behavior similar to my case, check your or configs
I was having a similar issue however my problem was with all browsers and not just webkit. I ended up going through and tearing up the web.config file and found out that a line: <xhtmlConformance mode="Legacy"> was preventing webresource.axd from working properly. The fix was to simply remove that line from my web.config file.
For a little more information on xhtmlConformance, visit http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/librarY/ms228268(v=vs.85).aspx.
If you scroll all the way to the bottom you'll notice it explicitly states that it causes issues with webresource.axd and scriptresource.axd.
What I'm looking for is some sort of a proxy tool that will allow me to specify a local file to load instead of one specified in the web page that is being browsed. I have tried Burp Suite which is almost working - it allows us to intercept a file and replace it by pasting the contents of the file we are swapping in into an input field. The file content is compiled code (Flash content) so we are pasting in bytecode, but something isn't working.
The reason is we are a 3rd party software developer without access to our client's development or testing environments. Our content must interact correctly with the rest of the content on their webpage (there are elements on their page that communicate with our content) and to test any changes we make takes several hours turnaround to get our files uploaded to their servers. So what we need is some sort of hacking tool to let us test our work with their web pages, hence the requirement to specify a file in a webpage to swap with a local version.
The autoresponder feature in Fiddler Web Debugging Proxy might do what you need, if it's only static content.
I've been using HTTP::Proxy for a long time, and it has always helped me fiddle with things on the fly.
You might be able to do this with Greasemonkey but I'm not sure if the tests will be totally reliable.
http://diveintogreasemonkey.org/patterns/replace-element.html
And if Greasemonkey seems plain wrong for you I would take it as the perfect excuse to try out mouseHole. Now I have to admit that I've never tried it but since _why also made Hpricot I expect it to be fun, productive, and different.