W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2004

Re: PATCH, gdiff, and random-access I/O

From: Justin Chapweske <justin@chapweske.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2004 18:36:48 -0500
To: Alex Rousskov <rousskov@measurement-factory.com>
Cc: HTTP working group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1083281808.30884.81.camel@bog>

> > In any case, I think it is important that the specification
> > recommend a delta format that can meet the needs of both diff/patch
> > type usage as well as remote random-access I/O patterns.
> I am not sure I agree. Would it be better to provide a different
> method for remote random-access I/O patterns? Random I/Os seem to have
> different enough priorities and possibly different set of essential
> operations to justify the increased complexity of morphing two content
> modification methods together.

I doubt that a different method is needed besides PATCH, but perhaps a
simple alternate diff format that can express these random-access I/Os
would be appropriate.

Honestly I don't know what the answer is since I have no expertise on
the specific diff/delta algorithms that are being discussed.  I would
just like to see a base-line format that can express these types of I/O
patterns in an easily implementable manner.


Received on Thursday, 29 April 2004 19:39:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:10:37 UTC