RE: Call for Consensus: Remove "reference set" from HPACK (to address #552)

We are OK with removing the reference set.  The marginal compression benefit does not justify the added complexity.

Thanks!!

-Rob

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Nottingham [mailto:mnot@mnot.net] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 7:32 PM
To: Greg Wilkins
Cc: HTTP Working Group
Subject: Re: Call for Consensus: Remove "reference set" from HPACK (to address #552)

What do people think of this proposal?

So far, my reading of the WG is that we want to get rid of the reference set, and are just talking about the details of how to do so.

Regards,


On 16 Jul 2014, at 12:13 pm, Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com> wrote:

> I ran the hpack test data through the various options being discussed for several different header table sizes:
> 
> HPACK/HEADER TABLE	0	1024	4096	16384
> h2-12	 64.22%	47.06%	42.18%	 41.82%
> h2-12-noRefSet	64.22%	 47.39%	42.57%	42.44%
> h2-12-noRefSet-noCopy	64.22%	47.16%	 42.50%	42.67%
> h2-12-noRefSet-noCopy-static1	 64.22%	47.18%	42.36%	 40.97%
> 
> 
> There is actually very little variation in results +/- 1% which is likely to be below the variation due to different data sets.       So on that basis we should go for the simplest mechanism, which is either h2-12-noRefSet-noCopy  or h2-12-noRefSet-noCopy-static1
> 
> But if we trust that data set, then the best compression was achieved with h2-12-noRefSet-noCopy-static1 and a large header table.    Also h2-12-noRefSet-noCopy-static1 was better than h2-12-noRefSet-noCopy for all but the 1024 table size.
> 
> So on this data we should go with h2-12-noRefSet-noCopy-static1
> 
> h2-12 == the HPACK used by draft 12 of HTTP noRefSet == no Reference 
> Set noCopy == Do not copy static fields to the header table
> static1 == Static indexes are 1-61, dynamic are 62-...
> 
> 
> cheers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 16 July 2014 11:01, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 1:21 PM, Martin Thomson 
> <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 15 July 2014 12:14, Jason Greene <jason.greene@redhat.com> wrote:
> >> Whatever happened with this idea? Searching my archives I couldn't find it getting rejected. I also don't see an issue filed for it.
> >
> > Search for "typed codecs" and variations on the same.
> >
> > Also: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-snell-httpbis-bohe-13  (note 
> > the version number)
> >
> 
> Note also that the version number is reflective only of my own 
> editing/publishing style and not of any particular amount of 
> consideration from the WG
> 
> - James
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>
> http://eclipse.org/jetty HTTP, SPDY, Websocket server and client that 
> scales http://www.webtide.com  advice and support for jetty and cometd.

--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/

Received on Wednesday, 16 July 2014 03:06:26 UTC