4 ms·
Indeed, out of all the trillions of HTTP requests that are communicated every day how many get read by a human. Not a lot, yet that's the use-case it's optimise
by secondcoming 5y ago
Indeed, out of all the trillions of HTTP requests that are communicated every day how many get read by a human. Not a lot, yet that's the use-case it's optimised for.
Those on the cloud should compute how much HTTP headers count towards their traffic egress bill.
Everyone is fine with human-readable as long as it's in English.
Binary should be the default. If writing a binary to human decoder is too much for you, you're in the wrong job.
- yardstick 5y agoHTTP/2 uses a binary encoding instead of text for performance reasons. I prefer the text version myself as it’s easier to write simple tools for (quick clients, telnet based queries, etc).
- PeterisP 5y agoIs a custom binary format that much more efficient than a gzipped human-readable format? If not, then it makes all sense to have a mostly universal decoder instead of a hundred different ones, especially since decoders of custom binary formats has traditionally been a major source of security vulnerabilities and other bugs even when those decoders have been written by skilled people and used in production for years.
- rytcio 5y agoThe answer is in your comment. If you add a step of decompression, then text parsing...it's plain-as-day going to be a lot slower then just pushing bits through a binary parser. Less work = faster