- From: Ted Hardie <hardie@merlot.arc.nasa.gov>
- Date: Mon, 18 Dec 1995 12:37:30 -0800 (PST)
- To: brian@organic.com (Brian Behlendorf)
- Cc: hammond@csc.albany.edu, www-talk@w3.org
I think I lost sight of the point here, and it might help if someone could restate how the solution Brian proposes below actually helps. As I understood it, pre-fetching is meant to improve apparent speed for page loading, by making "likely" target pages available to the user agent before the user requests them. Below is a synopsis of what I am (mis?)hearing from this discussion. Under one set of theories, the user agent requests pages it feels are likely before the user actually "clicks" on the pages (the "fish search" work described at WWW3 being one example of how this would work). This allows the user to set preferences about what sorts of pages are likely to be wanted and works for pages with links to multiple sites; it may, however, lead to piggish behavior in which a user/user agent request lots of things they don't use, thus overloading the servers. Under another set of theories, the server manager decides which of the pages it serves are related, and "pushes" related pages when one of the related set is requested. This prevents the piggish behavior by leaving some control in the hands of the server manager; it works for pages only on a single server, but it may work better for such pages because the designers understand which ones are related. Brian's suggestion seems to be a modification of the server push solution, designed to deal with the need he sees for server managers to have reasonable numbers for pages seen. In it, the server pushes related pages, but not whole pages--specific byte ranges, so that the user agent must request the rest of the document, thus giving a trigger event for Brian's statistics. The disadvantage to this is that this forces a new tcp connection and a second round trip, even for pages which might normally not reqire one, and it inherits the problem of not working for pages with links to multiple servers. Given the need for a new round trip and the need to merge the pre-fetched parts with the rest of their ranges, I really wonder how much of an advantage this version of server-push will be for the basic point: improving apparent speed for page loading. I also really wonder how easy it will be to handle caching with this system (pushing related pages onto a cache seems like a win to me, but pushing partial pages onto a cache seems like a lose). Knowing that Brian has a lot of experience in these matters, however, makes me suspect that I am missing the point, and I hope someone can enlighten me. Ted Hardie NASA Science Internet Brian Behlendorf <brian@organic.com> writes: > Hmm, after a little thought, it seems like an even smoother solution would be > to leave pre-fetching up to the server completely. I.e., if someone requests > a page from my server, I return to them not only that page but the first n > bytes (or all) of each subpage in a multipart message. That leaves it up to > me, the page designer/server administrator, to decide exactly what parts of > my site can be optimized in such a way, and it lets me tune the prefetching > algorithms to my liking. > > It may be both a protocol and UI challenge to model the act of a server > "throwing" unrequested content at a client... perhaps left for HTTP-NG? > > Brian > > --=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-- > brian@organic.com brian@hyperreal.com http://www.[hyperreal,organic].com/ > >
Received on Monday, 18 December 1995 15:37:49 UTC