- From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2014 20:27:28 +0000
- To: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
- cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
In message <CAP+FsNehJkfSsnJ9=1d6joCgsskuyfiiUGb5fGp4L0QYgVO7SQ@mail.gmail.com> , Roberto Peon writes: >You're missing out on all of the other second order effects. >[...] >CPU is often far less costly than keeping the radio or screen on. You're welcome to count any and all secondary effects of HTTP/2.0 to its advantage, provided you can show they exist, or even better if you can actually measure them. It would be pretty trivial to set up two Soekris boxes with a WLAN connection and measure the total power consumption running the same HTTP workload through HTTP/1.1 or HTTP/2.0. Poul-Henning -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Sunday, 1 June 2014 20:27:51 UTC