On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 10:26 AM, Mark Thomas wrote:
> On 05/09/2014 15:17, Mark Thomas wrote:
> > On 05/09/2014 15:06, Rossen Stoyanchev wrote:
> >> On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Mark Thomas wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 05/09/2014 13:46, Rossen Stoyanchev wrote:
> When a browser tab is a closed a
On 05/09/2014 15:17, Mark Thomas wrote:
> On 05/09/2014 15:06, Rossen Stoyanchev wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Mark Thomas wrote:
>>
>>> On 05/09/2014 13:46, Rossen Stoyanchev wrote:
When a browser tab is a closed a stack trace shows up (see below). I
>>> think
the stack trac
On 05/09/2014 15:06, Rossen Stoyanchev wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Mark Thomas wrote:
>
>> On 05/09/2014 13:46, Rossen Stoyanchev wrote:
>>> When a browser tab is a closed a stack trace shows up (see below). I
>> think
>>> the stack trace means the closing didn't completely cleanly b
On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Mark Thomas wrote:
> On 05/09/2014 13:46, Rossen Stoyanchev wrote:
> > When a browser tab is a closed a stack trace shows up (see below). I
> think
> > the stack trace means the closing didn't completely cleanly because the
> > client didn't wait. Hence probably no
On 05/09/2014 13:46, Rossen Stoyanchev wrote:
> When a browser tab is a closed a stack trace shows up (see below). I think
> the stack trace means the closing didn't completely cleanly because the
> client didn't wait. Hence probably nothing to worry about, yet the logs
> fill up with stack traces.
When a browser tab is a closed a stack trace shows up (see below). I think
the stack trace means the closing didn't completely cleanly because the
client didn't wait. Hence probably nothing to worry about, yet the logs
fill up with stack traces. Is there anything that can be done to improve
logging
