> On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 8:14 AM, Dhruv Matani <dhruvbird at gmail.com> wrote:
>> For example, say rid=10 and rid=11 were sent to the server and the
>> server responded back in the correct order. However, the responses
>> came in as 11 first and then 10 which means that the client will
>> necessarily have to use the rid to re-order the packets. The reason
>> for this is that the payload for the packet with rid=10 was much
>> higher than that for rid=11 and it took longer for the complete
>> response to come in.
>
>> This has complicated processing for me, and I think if many people are
>> to adopt it, it makes sense to separate the 2 (except if there is a
>> really pressing reason to keep them together - such as not mandating
>> ACKs).
>
> You'll have to deal with this anyway, or you'd process responses in
> the wrong order.  It shouldn't be difficult to deal with this with
> XHR.  In rough pseudocode, it'd look something like this:

Exactly my point! So, keeping the 2 (request & response IDs) together
doesn't really help simplify the code (since out-of-order
re-construction needs to be performed in either case) and "keeping a
queue of sent requests, and reading responses from sockets in the same
order you made requests" won't quite be the right thing to do. There
is still post-processing to be done in either situation.


Regards,
-Dhruv.

-- 
   -Dhruv Matani.
http://dhruvbird.com/

"What's the simplest thing that could possibly work?"
-- Ward Cunningham

Reply via email to