- From: Patrick McManus <mcmanus@ducksong.com>
- Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2010 10:33:58 -0400
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 15:53 +1000, Mark Nottingham wrote: > Good question. While we could run some studies against top100 Web > sites, etc., it would IMO be more useful if we could get some stats > from implementations that do use pipelining; namely, Opera and Mozilla > (when enabled). > > I wonder how feasible it would be to have them collect stats (e.g., # > of reqs successfully pipelined, average pipeline length, pipeline > errors broken down by type) and have the user opt into them being sent > to a server. > its a little off topic, but mozilla has been having a discussion on their platform list regarding stats collection and the value of characterizing the web in general. fyi: http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.dev.platform/browse_thread/thread/a9745463f8dd01f9# > False positives are a concern, but at worst pipelining wouldn't work > in those cases; i.e., the Web site still would, so it would be a > "soft" failure. well, the transaction presumably has to be redone in a non pipelined context so there is a real cost to the false positive. But yes, it doesn't really break anything so the only important question is how often would it happen? My gut says it would happen a whole lot more often than actual pipelining errors happen - especially because server operators wouldn't have good visibility into it even occurring and it seems the conditions for the origin-server and the user-agent to have different views of the URI are common enough. > What I'm trying to do is create some aids to pipelining deployment that might even be temporary +1 ! (re md5) > If so, I don't think it provides everything that assoc-req does; it doesn't tie the response to its associated request. you're right. For a moment, I had my head wrapped around headers and bodies being mismatched rather than requests and responses. > > Also along those lines, md-5 plays well with proxies. Assoc-req makes my > > head hurt - the draft says proxies should never generate assoc-req (and > > Why does Assoc-Req make that hard? > A week's mulling has mellowed me on this point.. but I'm reacting to assoc-req being only generated on the origin server, but pipelines potentially being added and removed at various hops. Origin is optimal, sure, but isn't it still valuable if a proxy adds the response header as long as it doesn't already exist - it is matching the request and response as close to the origin as something that supports it is capable of doing...
Received on Tuesday, 31 August 2010 14:34:27 UTC