On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 2:47 AM, Markus Schaber <m.scha...@3s-software.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Von: Greg Stein [mailto:gst...@gmail.com] >> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Mark Phippard <markp...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >... >> > https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=381620 >> >> Oh dear. I just looked at this bug report. >> >> The basic problem is that they're talking to a "dumb" HTTP server. To get >> anywhere, they need a custom server first. [...] > > I agree here. > > A simple "check for update" could be done sending a single UDP packet > containg a list of keys (package names, uuids or similar), and the reply is > another UDP packet containing the available versions. > > Thus the whole transaction would produce less traffic than a single http > request now.
Sure. I'd be surprised if this is even possible. They only just enabled keep-alives on their proxy/server a few months ago. (ie. every request involved a bunch of TCP setup packets) Personally, any sort of custom server, I'd probably avoid a UDP port, and stick to just serving some HTTP. Once you open a connection, and you can support pipelining, then many issues go away. (not the least of which: dropped UDP packets) Anyway... sounds like we agree Markus: they ought to start building a server. It would help eclipse.org, and when deployed across the broader community... big wins. Cheers, -g
