Increase auto-processing timeout in ISIS Reflectometry GUI

[rbauststfc]

Description of work

Summary of work

This is causing quite a bit of inconvenience on IDAaaS at the moment, so this is a quick and temporary fix to try and alleviate that. Increasing the interval at which we're polling for new runs should allow time for the data to be copied into the instrument data cache and available for reduction. Currently about 50% of runs are appearing in the Reflectometry GUI before the file is available and this is causing auto-processing to stall, creating confusion.

Longer term we will put a fix in place so that the GUI is fundamentally more robust to timing issues with files becoming available.

Refs #36860.

Further detail of work

To test:

It's difficult to test this with live data from an instrument as part of a quick PR test (although I have tested this locally), but the following will confirm that the functionality is still working:

1. Open the ISIS Reflectometry GUI.
2. On the Runs tab, enter investigation ID 1120015 and cycle 11_3.
3. Click the Autoprocess button. This should retrieve all available runs and display them in the search bar. Then it should automatically transfer them to the main table on the right hand side and start reducing them. You do not need to wait to ensure they all complete, just wait for a few and then click Pause to stop the Autoprocessing (this can take some time to stop).

This does not require release notes because it is a temporary fix that will be superseded by a more complete fix in future.

---

Reviewer

Please comment on the points listed below (full description).
Your comments will be used as part of the gatekeeper process, so please comment clearly on what you have checked during your review. If changes are made to the PR during the review process then your final comment will be the most important for gatekeepers. In this comment you should make it clear why any earlier review is still valid, or confirm that all requested changes have been addressed.

Code Review

• Is the code of an acceptable quality?
• Does the code conform to the coding standards?
• Are the unit tests small and test the class in isolation?
• If there is GUI work does it follow the GUI standards?
• If there are changes in the release notes then do they describe the changes appropriately?
• Do the release notes conform to the release notes guide?

Functional Tests

• Do changes function as described? Add comments below that describe the tests performed?
• Do the changes handle unexpected situations, e.g. bad input?
• Has the relevant (user and developer) documentation been added/updated?

Does everything look good? Mark the review as Approve. A member of @mantidproject/gatekeepers will take care of it.

Gatekeeper

If you need to request changes to a PR then please add a comment and set the review status to "Request changes". This will stop the PR from showing up in the list for other gatekeepers.

[sf1919]

Happy to approve this as it's a simple, quick fix that shouldn't break anything.