17.01.2002 12:09:45, Jean-Philippe Courson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hi, > > > >Webfolders seems to have a nasty way of doing PUT requests : > > >The context : > >Here is what you can see in webdav_access_log : > >"HEAD /b2web/jumal/private/INSTALL.TXT HTTP/1.1" 404 607 >"PUT /b2web/jumal/private/INSTALL.TXT HTTP/1.1" 201 >"HEAD /b2web/jumal/private/INSTALL.TXT HTTP/1.1" 200 - >"PUT /b2web/jumal/private/INSTALL.TXT HTTP/1.1" 204 - >"HEAD /b2web/jumal/private/NSTALL.TXT HTTP/1.1" 200 - > >Adding some debug code, I realized that webfolders were >-> firstly doing a PUT request to create an empty file > (contentLength was defined but equal to 0) >-> only then performing a PUT request with the file's content. > >I'm pretty sure of this behaviour. The only thing I can't really >understand is why second PUT returns 204 ? Are log writtings >synchronized ? > > >Implications : > >When we receive a PUT request that would exhaust user quota : >-> the first PUT request is accepted (contentLength is ok) >-> the second one is rejected (contentLength is too big) > > >Result : > >All refused upload requests are ending by an empty file creation. >And you can even lost a file that was having the same name but was >ligther. waitaminute. if the first HEAD request doesn't return 404 but rather 200/204 (i.e. a resource does already exist at the requested URI), does web-folders STILL create an empty file ?? if yes, that would be very evil IMHO. imagine a webdav-server with auto-versioning. you'd get one extra revision (the empty file) for every actual change made. > > >Does anybody have ideas on how we could avoid these problems ? > > >JP > > >-- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:slide-dev- [EMAIL PROTECTED]> >For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:slide-dev- [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > -chris ________________________________________________________________ cmlenz at gmx.de -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
