At Mon, 10 Apr 2006 16:26:11 +0000 (GMT), Thomas Chust wrote: > > - I wonder if (ensure-local-connections) is a good way; > > since threads are chaper than connections, shouldn't we > > reuse connection among threads? > > Hello, > > I do think it is a good idea. If you don't do it this way, you have to > apply extensive mutex locking, which will likely kill any speed advantage > of the connection pooling should you really make heavy use of http > transfers in multiple threads. If you use neither seperate pools nor > locking, you will end up with multiple threads writing their requests to > the connection at the same time, resulting in a complete mess.
Oh, that was my misunderstanding about (make-parameter) being thread-local. > > - My rough test shows some delay with keep-alive connections; > > somehow (read-string) is slow with the length specified. > > What's the problem? > > - In order to support persistent connection, the support of > > Transfer-Encoding: chunked > > would be required; > > but I didn't come up with a nice implementation idea for http:GET. > > Any comments? > > Currently I can't think of anything helpful on these two points. Well, I will try more on the first one. For the second one, comments would be nice from anyone on the list who are interested in HTTP/1.1. Thanks, Daishi _______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
