[httperf] Bug Fix Patches to Date

Mark Nottingham mnot at yahoo-inc.com
Sun Nov 26 22:05:44 PST 2006

On 2006/11/26, at 3:20 PM, Ted Bullock wrote:

> Is this something that should be added to all the HTTP/1.0 and 1.1
> requests or just this specific case?  I am unfamiliar with the  
> protocols.
> I can see the following lines of code which are very similar:
> static char http10req[] =
>   " HTTP/1.0\r\nUser-Agent: httperf/"VERSION"\r\nHost: ";
> static char http11req[] =
>   " HTTP/1.1\r\nUser-Agent: httperf/"VERSION"\r\nHost: ";
> static char http10req_nohost[] =
>   " HTTP/1.0\r\nUser-Agent: httperf/"VERSION"\r\n";
> static char http11req_nohost[] =
>   " HTTP/1.1\r\nUser-Agent: httperf/"VERSION"\r\n";
> Is this a change that would be useful in all of the above or just the
> one you specified?  Also, is this something that would be useful if it
> were dynamically applied?

It should be in both of the htp10req*'s, and probably doesn't need to  
be dynamic (unless you want to only emit it when there's more than  
one request per connection).

Basically, HTTP/1.0 doesn't have persistent connections by default  
(like HTTP/1.1), so clients have to explicitly say that they support  
persistent connections, or the server will assume they don't, and  
promptly close the connection after the first request. This causes  
problems when you're testing a HTTP/1.0 device with more than one  
request per connection (which is often necessary to avoid client-side  
resource constraints).


Mark Nottingham
mnot at yahoo-inc.com

More information about the httperf mailing list