Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Sun, 29 Apr 2001 14:25:11 -0700 | From | Fabio Riccardi <> | Subject | Re: X15 alpha release: as fast as TUX but in user space |
| |
I can disable header caching and see what happens, I'll add an option for this in the next X15 release.
Nevertheless I don't know how much this is interesting in real life, since on the internet most static pages are cached on proxies. I agree that the RFC asks for a date for the original response, but once the response is cached what does this date mean?
- Fabio
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> Fabio, > > i noticed one weirdness in the Date-field handling of X15. X15 appears to > cache the Date field too, which is contrary to RFCs: > > earth2:~> wget -s http://localhost/index.html -O - 2>/dev/null | grep Date > Date: Sat Apr 28 10:15:14 2001 > earth2:~> date > Sat Apr 28 10:32:40 CEST 2001 > > ie. there is already a 15 minutes difference between the 'origin date of > the reply' and the actual date of the reply. (i started X15 up 15 minutes > ago.) > > per RFC 2616: > ............. > The Date general-header field represents the date and time at which the > message was originated, [...] > > Origin servers MUST include a Date header field in all responses, [...] > ............. > > i considered the caching of the Date field for TUX too, and avoided it > exactly due to this issue, to not violate this 'MUST' item in the RFC. It > can be reasonably expected from a web server to have a 1-second accurate > Date: field. > > the header-caching in X15 gives it an edge against TUX, obviously, but IMO > it's a questionable practice. > > if caching of headers was be allowed then we could the obvious trick of > sendfile()ing complete web replies (first header, then body). > > Ingo
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |