W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > January to April 2000

RE: On pipelining

From: Scott Lawrence <lawrence@agranat.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2000 10:59:41 -0500
To: "Daniel Hellerstein" <DANIELH@mailbox.econ.ag.gov>, <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com>
Message-ID: <001b01bf6428$86c6ace0$954768c0@oyster.agranat.com>

> Basically,  in the following scenario (from mike sabin)..
> >  Request1
> >  Request2
>  > Request3
> >         Response1
> >           Response2
>  >         Response3
> >(although, clearly, if there are many requests we might expect
> >the request stream to partially overlap the response stream).
> would "resolution of request2" await the completion of
> transmission
> of response1? Or can these  3 requests be resolved simultaneously
> (say, using
> seperate threads); with first response1 sent, then 2, then 3.
> That is, could a multi-threaded server create response2,  wait for
> succesful transmission of  response1 (over the persistent
> connection),
> and then transmit response2 (over this
> same persistent connection)?

If request1 is a GET, HEAD, TRACE, or OPTIONS, then I would say that
the server could legitimately assume that it had no side effects.
One could be more conservative and assume that any CGI (or CGI-like)
resource had side effects.  Having assumed that there were no side
effects it might be reasonable to overlap the processing, if you
have the buffer space to spare.

Scott Lawrence      Director of R & D        <lawrence@agranat.com>
Agranat Systems   Embedded Web Technology   http://www.agranat.com/
Received on Friday, 21 January 2000 16:03:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:24 UTC