httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dean Gaudet <>
Subject Re: request that we support TE
Date Tue, 14 Jul 1998 21:47:33 GMT

On Tue, 14 Jul 1998, Alexei Kosut wrote:

> On Tue, 14 Jul 1998, Jim Gettys wrote:
> > > Is there something here I'm missing? Is he saying we should also implement
> > > other transfer-codings, e.g., deflate? In that case, of course, TE would
> > > make sense to implement...
> > 
> > 
> > Yes, I'm saying that transfer-coding deflate (and gzip, but it isn't as 
> > efficient as deflate due to the unneeded file overhead) is a good thing...  
> > To do so in a routine way that is cache safe, you need to deal with TE.  
> > As I said, RFC2068 is buggy in this area, and TE is the fix. 
> Ah. Okay, I get it now.
> Yes, I agree it would be good to support deflate. But I agree with Dean
> that it's non-trivial doing it with the way Apache is currently set up
> internally (although it makes a good case for layered i/o, Dean *grin*).
> It could be added somewhat easily for static or already-coded files,
> though, which is what I suspect Dean meant when he referred to a mod_te.

mod_te could also maintain a cache directory of gzipped files. 
mod_mmap_static is a good example of how to override the underlying
default handler.  I was actually referring to building a cache -- that's
about the only way this would be useful in my opinion. 

Layered i/o helps if you want to gzip mod_include, for example.


View raw message