On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 3:09 PM, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 26/01/2012 23:15, Mark Thomas wrote: > > Good news. The WebSocket implementation has reached a state where you > > should be able to play with it. Receiving and sending of binary and text > > data via streams/writers and messages is all working as long as you > > don't use continuation frames. See the Echo example for the general idea. > > Some minor tweaks and clean-up [1]. Main improvement is that now if you > write more data than the buffer can handle it doesn't fall over. > > > I'm leaning towards committing this > > on the grounds that it changes very little of the existing code and - > > fingers crossed - it should stay that way. It will be easier for the > > wider community to experiment and provide patches once it is in trunk. I > > expect that the back-port to 7.0.x will wait until things were more > > feature complete and any obvious performance issues had been addressed. > > No-one has complained about this (yet) so I'll probably commit this some > time next week. > Not complaining - it's great to add this feature, please commit it - but I'm wondering if a lighter interface wouldn't be better. From looking at the implementation, it seems after the upgrade it keeps the InputBuffer/OutputBuffer ( and the whole Request / Processor / etc tree ). Would it be possible for example to release the Request, like it's done after request, in keep-alive, and use a lighter parser/callback on the socket ? I think one of the use cases for websockets is to support a _lot_ of open connections. Also the interface may be simpler without InputStreams. Costin > > > Anyway, I hope you enjoy playing with this. As always, feedback welcome. > > Mark > > [1] > http://people.apache.org/~markt/patches/draft/2012-01-27-websocket.patch > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org > >
