3 ms·
it makes more sense than HTTP/2, which is retarded, but still widely adopted. It's incredible how many servers can't do pipelining when queried with HTTP/1, bu
by mgaunard 3y ago
it makes more sense than HTTP/2, which is retarded, but still widely adopted.
It's incredible how many servers can't do pipelining when queried with HTTP/1, but do it fine with HTTP/2.
- kiitos 3y agoFor someone who complains about web stuff so much, it's weird that you don't have a better understanding of the technology. No amount of pipelining can fix HTTP/1's request-per-connection model enough to make it competitive with HTTP/2.
- mgaunard 3y agoI would say I have a pretty good understanding of Ethernet, IP, TCP, and also HTTP, having written implementations of that full stack several times -- including pretty sophisticated ultra-low-latency tricks. HTTP/2 implements multiplexing on top of TCP, which is just plain stupid. TCP is not meant to be used for this, and doing this is actively harmful; the correct thing to do is to establish multiple TCP connections. That sort of thing is not surprising since most of web and cloud tech is all about re-implementing low-level components on top of inadequate high-level abstractions. The main reason to use HTTP/2 is simply that when a server provides both 1 and 2, the backend quality will typically be much better on 2.
- kiitos 3y agoExhibit A > I would say I have a pretty good understanding of ... HTTP Exhibit B > HTTP/2 implements multiplexing on top of TCP, which is just plain stupid ... the correct thing to do is to establish multiple TCP connections