[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-1777?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13642909#comment-13642909
]
Marek Kowalski commented on COUCHDB-1777:
-----------------------------------------
Again I think its a correct guess. I think so, because I was wondering how is
it possible that I hit the time window so easily. It would be explained if
CouchDB is awaiting for more bytes to come, and my client is sending new
request lines instead.
> 409 response vs persitent connection
> ------------------------------------
>
> Key: COUCHDB-1777
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-1777
> Project: CouchDB
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Database Core
> Reporter: Marek Kowalski
>
> CouchDB closes the persistent client connection after responding with 409
> code. This behavior is not necessarily against the RFC 2616, although it
> makes it more complicated to use pipelining.
> If its really necessary to close the connection, it would be nice to at least
> put the "Connection: close" in the response headers. If the connection can be
> closed without informing client that this is going to happen, the client
> might start writing the new request to the connection. Again, according RFC
> 2616, this situation should be handled by the client, although the header
> could be added "as a courtesy".
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
