Re: Sticky stuff.
Anselm Baird-Smith (abaird@w3.org)
Fri, 9 Aug 1996 18:41:53 +0500
> >I think a new study would be needed to take these effects into account
> >before we can conclude that sticky headers aren't worth the effrort.
>
> I agree. To get something like a firm conclusion, at least one other
> study is needed. My study was done a year ago, with a small sample
> (145 Mb of traffic), and by someone who is not a statistician.
>
> However, I think there is enough data to conclude that sticky headers
> are *unlikely* to be worth the effort. I therefore see no reason for
> sticky headers to become a WG activity at this point.
As a server implementer, I feel that one thing is missing from this
dicussion: the (CPU) time to parse headers. Sticky header allows for
reusing parsed header values, and at least in my Java web server, this
account for a non-negligible portion of the CPU time that is used to
handle a request (by optimizing this part of the server I got up to
20% speed improvements). However, I don't know if this applies to C
server as well...
Of course, I beleive that - still in my case - the CPU time to handle
sticky headers would not be greater then the time to parse, say, a
real Accept header.
Anselm.