- From: Hartmut Warncke <hwarncke@Adobe.COM>
- Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 17:58:26 +0100
- To: "Hall, Shaun" <Shaun.Hall@gbr.xerox.com>, WebDAV WG <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
> The implications of PROPFIND with an infinite depth affect both the server > and/or the client. Supposing you have a large WebDAV enabled repository. The > PROPFIND request (a few hundred bytes) could potentially mean that (tens of) > GBs of data is to be returned. Even if the server could generate such a > large response (which is a feat in its own right), it will load the network, > and what will happen when the client receives it? Pity the poor user sitting > there for a long time (hours?), only to be told "timed out" or "out of > memory" or something similar. Yes, of course, I completely understand your point of view. But as a matter of fact we like this "depth infinity" feature very much because we can use it in a very efficient way in some situations and therefore we are struggleing so hard for keeping that feature. > Changing the specification could break existing products, which is a bad > thing. Backwards compatibilty should be maintained. Good to hear that. But I am not quite sure how you will do that because if a server has the possibility to refuse a depth infinity request GoLive 5 will not be able to handle that situation (synchronization of client and server content will not work anymore). > We think the way forward for the WebDAV specification is to allow servers > the ability to refuse such requests and inform the client. A mechanism > should be defined for the client to understand this. If the client received > a response which basically stated that the server was refusing to service an > infinite depth request, it could issue multiple requests with a Depth:1. If you have to synchronize a very large site with thousands of files, replacing depth infinity requests by depth 1 requests would be a huge performance disaster for us. Best, Hartmut
Received on Wednesday, 22 November 2000 12:13:17 UTC