- From: Joris Dobbelsteen <joris.dobbelsteen@mail.com>
- Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 15:28:21 +0100
- To: "WWW WG (E-mail)" <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com>
- Message-ID: <001501c05ba3$28a32030$01ff1fac@Thuis.local>
Many apache servers send data chunked. Takes a couple bytes (average of 4) for every block transfered. Maybe a total overhead of an additional 20-40 bytes per transfer (maybe less). This is just a guess... - Joris > -----Original Message----- > From: francis@localhost.localdomain > [mailto:francis@localhost.localdomain]On Behalf Of John Stracke > Sent: Thursday 30 November, 2000 16:45 > To: http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com > Subject: Re: Http overhead > > > dillon@hns.com wrote: > > > The latest standard (HTTP 1.1) has provisions for > compression and "chunked" > > transfers which change this, but I haven't seen these used > in any real-world > > situations > > yet. > > Apache will recognize a file with a ".gz" extension as > gzipped, and send the > Content-Encoding: x-gzip line. Netscape will recognize > Content-Encoding: x-gzip, > and uncompress the file. Unfortunately, at least in my > installation (Apache > 1.3.14, Red Hat 7), Apache doesn't look at the extension > before the ".gz" to get > the content-type; "foo.txt.gz" gets marked as Content-Type: > application/x-gzip. > > -- > /=================================================================\ > |John Stracke | http://www.ecal.com |My opinions are my own. | > |Chief Scientist |================================================| > |eCal Corp. |But how do we know destroying the Van Allen belt| > |francis@ecal.com|will kill all life on Earth if we don't try it? | > \=================================================================/ > > > >
Received on Friday, 1 December 2000 06:42:07 UTC