- From: David Morris <dwm@xpasc.com>
- Date: Fri, 22 May 2009 09:39:40 -0700 (PDT)
- To: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
- cc: Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Fri, 22 May 2009, Jamie Lokier wrote: > Adrien de Croy wrote: >> >> there were discussions recently about the method being part of the cache >> key, since the response for different methods on the same URI could >> presumably be cacheable and different. >> >> What about query string? If the result to something that has a >> querystring is marked as cachable by the origin server, then is it >> deemed part of the URI for the cache key? I'd presume yes. > > Of coures, the query string is just part of the URI. > >> Since URIs can be arbitrarily long, yet database fields aren't good with >> this, I'd presume it's common practise to look up based on some hash >> value. Is this approach used? Is there any industry-standard hashing >> method, e.g. MD5 of method+URI(normalised) + querystring ? > > I doubt it. Why would you do that? I don't think it's normal to use > a URI to select an application and pass the querystring verbatim to a > database, or at least it's not a good idea :-) Why not? .. this is a caching related question where the URI is part of the cache key ... since I've not implemented such a cache, I can't speak to what I have done, but a hash such as MD5 seems reasonable ... in particular if followed by an exact match comparison with a value stored in a blob, etc.
Received on Friday, 22 May 2009 16:40:25 UTC