On Thursday 25 August 2011, Jim Jagielski wrote: > OK then… we seem to be coalescing into some consensus here… > basically, if the client sends stuff which is brain-dead stupid, > we simply 2000 and send the whole kit-and-kaboodle. > > I'd like to propose that we update the byterange filter to perform > the following: > > o coalesce all adjacent ranges, whether overlapping or not. > (eg: 200-250,251-300 & 200-250,220-300 both merge to 200-300)
This may still confuse a broken client. Maybe we could omit that from the 2.2 patch for now and only commit to 2.3. > o We count: > > the number of times a gap between ranges is <80bytes > > the number of times we hit a descendent range > (eg: 200-1000,2000-3000,1200-1500,4000-5000 would count as > 1) > the number of ranges total (post ascending merge) > If any >= some config-time limit, we send a 200 > > This is a start and was chosen simply for ease of implementation… > We can then expand it to be more functional… > > Comments? Please also look at the patch at http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/httpd- dev/201108.mbox/%3c201108250138.49474...@sfritsch.de%3E which greatly reduces the memory needed for the range requests. BTW, I won't have time to beat that into shape today. If anyone else has, please go ahead.
