On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 2:47 AM, Markus Schaber
<m.schaber_at_3s-software.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Von: Greg Stein [mailto:gstein_at_gmail.com]
>> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Mark Phippard <markphip_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>> >...
>> > https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=381620
>>
>> Oh dear. I just looked at this bug report.
>>
>> The basic problem is that they're talking to a "dumb" HTTP server. To get
>> anywhere, they need a custom server first. [...]
>
> I agree here.
>
> A simple "check for update" could be done sending a single UDP packet containg a list of keys (package names, uuids or similar), and the reply is another UDP packet containing the available versions.
>
> Thus the whole transaction would produce less traffic than a single http request now.
Sure. I'd be surprised if this is even possible. They only just
enabled keep-alives on their proxy/server a few months ago. (ie. every
request involved a bunch of TCP setup packets)
Personally, any sort of custom server, I'd probably avoid a UDP port,
and stick to just serving some HTTP. Once you open a connection, and
you can support pipelining, then many issues go away. (not the least
of which: dropped UDP packets)
Anyway... sounds like we agree Markus: they ought to start building a
server. It would help eclipse.org, and when deployed across the
broader community... big wins.
Cheers,
-g
Received on 2012-06-06 09:04:18 CEST