On Thu, 2009-04-16 at 23:09 +0100, Mark Thomas wrote: > Having now read Roy's comment on 39727 I'm leaning towards reverting > this patch and seeing what is possible following the Transfer-Encoding > route. I'll sleep on it in case a better idea occurs to me and come back > to this tomorrow.
If you look at the Coyote code, you can probably guess I originally thought about compression using transfer-encoding (prepareRequest is rather obvious about that), and it did not work. Content-encoding did, though. I don't understand why giving an option to not send an ETag would not also be a solution. At least, if it does not, I do not understand how proxies are not broken. I also think proxies should be smarter, and assume serving of both a compressed and an uncompressed version, obviously using the same ETag (and send the right version depending on whether or not the client has compression). Otherwise, there's no way things can be efficient. Rémy --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
