Joe Orton wrote:
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 04:05:34PM +0100, Hartmut Keil wrote:
> [...] From my point of view without
> drawbacks, since 'pipelining' clients must handle the closing of a
> connection after a complete response in any case.
Yes, I agree, this seems very sensible, I can't see any problem with
this.
It seems very sensible *if* it works in practice, it would be better to
check with clients if they actually implement this properly.
If it's so easy, I'm surprised it hasn't been done earlier, instead of
that ugly solution of queuing POST requests inside a buffer (ref bug 39243)
