Remove CHDMAN Timeout

[heymufti]

I have a 24 core CPU and NVME drive and this artificial timeout you're setting is killing jobs before they can complete. Even with 1 concurrent job only, let alone 3 by default. CHDMAN will quit on it's own on error with a code. Please remove it, or add an option to ignore it. Super frustrating.

setTimer, thread_timeout, % (TIMEOUT_SEC*1000)*3 ; Set timeout timer timeout time x2

I believe this is in milliseconds and you're only giving 3 seconds.

https://documentation.help/AutoHotKey-Functions/SetTimer.htm

"Creates or updates a timer using the absolute value of this parameter as the approximate number of milliseconds that must pass before the timer is executed."

The other issue I'm having is that I can't DO anything while this is running because it keeps taking window focus. I've had to refocus typing this a dozen times. Games will minimize or crash because namDHC is taking focus after every job.

[djismgaming]

I thought I was going 🤪 crazy! The timeout is killing me too.

[orbitinstasis]

Having the time out issue as well, i didn't use to have problems with chdman.

[djismgaming]

I ended downloading the latest version of 'chdman' as I wanted to use the 'createdvd' option in the command for some of my backups.

There is no way to select that option at the moment in this front end.

[vbriand]

The timeout is in fact 60 seconds, not 3 seconds since TIMEOUT_SEC is set to 20 by default.

I didn't look too long into the code, but for a quick fix you can either increase TIMEOUT_SEC := 20 in namDHC.ahk or just increase it in if ( (a_TickCount - job.msgData[a_index].timeout) > (TIMEOUT_SEC*1000) ) {.

[heymufti]

There should not be a timeout by default. If my 9850X on an 8000Mbps NVME is hitting the 60 seconds, everyone would. I don't even understand the need for a timeout. Exiting the application will stop the process if it's hung. I just made my own script and don't use this app.

[Masamune3210]

the timeout isn't a bad idea, no code is perfect and its more friendly to the user to handle such cases where the timeout is reached gracefully than to leave them hanging around for something that might never return in any useful way. The issue is that the timeout is just a bit broken.

[heymufti]

How is the timeout "not a bad idea" if the application won't function on one of the fastest CPUs on the market? I've moved on.

[Masamune3210]

Unless you plan on timesharing that precious CPU of yours to the entire internet, other options should be kept in mind.

Turns out, you aren't the only person who has ever or will ever use this.....

[heymufti]

Again, if the second fastest CPU on the market is hitting the ARTIFICIAL and completely unnecessary timeout. All other CPUs will. I'm done with "conversation". The timeout is OBJECTIVELY breaking the app. It's OBJECTIVELY hindering it's operation. It's OBJECTIVELY not required for literally any reason. My post is OBJECTIVELY warranted. Whatever tirade you're on is unwelcome and completely antithetical to creating a functional application. I wrote my own, I've moved on. The author has abandoned it. You're trolling.