httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
Subject Re: [PATCH] byterange handling with filters
Date Fri, 03 Nov 2000 00:21:39 GMT
On Thu, 2 Nov 2000, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 03:43:01PM -0800, wrote:
> > On Thu, 2 Nov 2000, Greg Stein wrote:
> >...
> > > 2) comment: what are the ap_rflush() calls doing in there?
> > 
> > If we don't flush the data that we have already sent, then the byte-range
> > information will end up at the wrong point in the response.  This is why I
> > am not sure that the code will actually work, and I think this should be a
> > filter.
> Euh. I must have missed something (and I've deleted the message). Are you
> sending the byterange stuff to the connection (output) filters rather than
> the content filters? Eek.
> I can understand why that may be the case, but it will break. The FLUSH
> bucket is only advisory, IIRC. A filter may need to continue to hold onto
> some of the output.

Yeah, that's what I was thinking too.  We have to send the byte-range
stuff directly to the connection filters, because it isn't content that
can be modified.  I guess I'll toss this implementation, which is why I
posted it, I wanted/needed some in depth thought/feedback on this.

> I think you're right: punt on this implementation and make it a filter. It
> is the only way that we can be sure that we get the proper semantics and
> ordering.

Yep, implementing now.


Ryan Bloom               
406 29th St.
San Francisco, CA 94131

View raw message