- From: Savas Parastatidis <Savas.Parastatidis@newcastle.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 00:12:29 -0000
- To: "David Orchard" <dorchard@bea.com>, <www-ws@w3.org>
Dave, > Even your quotation of stateless interaction doesn't make it clear. Roy > has said that a cookie with a session id is a stateless interaction to a > stateful service. This differs from something like ftp in which the > connection contains part of the state. One way that http scales better > than ftp is because http can tear down the connections because of the > stateless interactions, and connections are very costly to maintain open > for potentially large numbers of clients. > > Now as to what's going on at the plumbing level in tcp/ip stacks I > haven't a clue about. Why ftp creating and keeping large #s of > connections open with state being embodied in the ftp/tcp connection is > soo much more costly and less scalable than an http stateless tcp > connection is a mystery to me. Especially when software can do SSL > connections that can be fairly chatty and bandwidth consuming. Isn't it the case that because of the stateless connections one can farm the processing of the requests and achieve higher levels of scalability even if more bandwidth is consumed? .savas.
Received on Thursday, 4 November 2004 00:12:43 UTC