httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From (Robert S. Thau)
Subject Re: sloppy URLs
Date Fri, 07 Apr 1995 20:00:25 GMT
   From: Rob Hartill <>
   Date: Fri, 7 Apr 95 17:23:55 MDT

   > Rob --- just a question --- have you actually looked at the logs from
   > any of your sites and determined what percentage of responses get
   > redirected?  If it's five or less, I don't think it's at all worth
   > worrying about...

   > (FYI, here, it's about 0.3%).

   Well, you can argue that the other way. If only 0.3% of links
   are broken, it won't hurt too many people to inforce the
   correct behaviour  :-)

Note the implicit assumption that each person follows only one link.
If you make more realistic assumptions (say, 10 to 12 transactions per
customer), the number of people affected rises correspondingly.

   You can't argue it both ways, one minute we're upsetting lots of
   people using these bad links, now they're an insignificant number.

Sure I can.  Watch me: Even if this only affects 1% of the people
visiting my site on a given day (and I think that number's a bit low),
that's still more people than I care to annoy without good cause.  The
cost of keeping them happy is *miniscule* --- the server spends much
more of its time, proportionately, interpreting printf control

(Actually _doprnt consumes surprisingly many cycles; last time I ran a
profile, it was about 4% --- all user CPU, mostly in _doprnt itself,
so there's no contamination here from the underlying writes.  This
exceeds the load on my site from all redirects by roughly an order of
magnitude.  Many of those printf()-variant calls could be replaced, or
at least cheapened, at the expense of obfuscating the code.  I've made
a principled decision that it just ain't worth the trouble.  These
redirects are worth less).

   Enough. If I haven't convinced you yet, you must be a die hard type
   with a broken '/' key on your keyboard.  :-)


Hey, so long as it's a config-file option, and off by default, I won't
blackball it.  But with all the other stuff lying around that consume
so much more significant trifles of the server's resources, I really
have trouble understanding why you're focused on *this*.


View raw message