4 ms·
There are some problems in HTTP pipelining. Nevertheless Firefox and Opera have pipelining implementations that work and are significantly faster than HTTP wit
by 0xABADC0DA 15y ago
There are some problems in HTTP pipelining. Nevertheless Firefox and Opera have pipelining implementations that work and are significantly faster than HTTP with keepalive. It's enabled by default in Opera.
The point being that they've designed this new protocol based on their assumptions and hunches. Same lack of rigor is present throughout the whole spec -- take a look at how much redundancy is in the prefix dictionary for instance.
- igrigorik 15y agohttp://www.chromium.org/spdy http://www.chromium.org/spdy - contains some great and in-depth research motivating SPDY. Original whitepaper: http://www.chromium.org/spdy/spdy-whitepaper http://www.chromium.org/spdy/spdy-whitepaper Here's a good tech talk to checkout as well: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNBkxA313kk http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNBkxA313kk Draft 3 has also updated the dictionary, here's the research paper motivating the change: http://www.eecis.udel.edu/~amer/PEL/poc/pdf/SPDY-Fan.pdf http://www.eecis.udel.edu/~amer/PEL/poc/pdf/SPDY-Fan.pdf
- agentS 15y agoChromium and Chrome Dev Channel has (off by default) pipelining. Pipelining can only be done for idempotent requests, (ie GET only), has head of line blocking problems, and can break proxies. Also, its very difficult to handle errors in a pipelined situation. For example, if the 2nd request in a pipeline fails, but the server has been processing 3rd and 4th concurrently, what response does it give? I think most engineers would agree that multiplexing over a single connection is better and less error-prone than pipelining.