W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2013

Re: Choosing a header compression algorithm

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 16:55:36 +1100
Cc: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <7CA7F3EB-A492-471A-8AC4-23293DD10840@mnot.net>
To: RUELLAN Herve <Herve.Ruellan@crf.canon.fr>

On 23/03/2013, at 5:04 AM, RUELLAN Herve <Herve.Ruellan@crf.canon.fr> wrote:

> I think it would be good to move this from the compressors to the streamifier. In addition, it would be interesting to look at a more realistic streamifier that could for example unshard hosts (expecting that HTTP/2.0 will remove the sharding currently done by server developers).

Right now, it combines all requests to the same TLD (according to the Public Suffix List) into a single "connection." Do you have a suggestion for how to do it better?

I've just pushed a quick and dirty fix to use a new instance of each compressor for each connection; the results are pretty even between headerdiff and delta2, with a small increase in each:

* TOTAL: 5948 req messages
                                       size  time | ratio min   max   std
                        http1     3,460,925  0.18 | 1.00  1.00  1.00  0.00
  delta2 (max_byte_size=4096)       707,901 11.87 | 0.20  0.03  0.83  0.15
     headerdiff (buffer=4096)       960,106  1.65 | 0.28  0.01  0.96  0.23

* TOTAL: 5948 res messages
                                       size  time | ratio min   max   std
                        http1     2,186,162  0.28 | 1.00  1.00  1.00  0.00
  delta2 (max_byte_size=4096)       622,837 12.86 | 0.28  0.02  1.22  0.13
     headerdiff (buffer=4096)       596,290  3.65 | 0.27  0.02  0.92  0.18

Cheers,


--
Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Monday, 25 March 2013 05:56:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 25 March 2013 05:56:09 GMT