[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-2480?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17637807#comment-17637807
 ] 

ASF GitHub Bot commented on TINKERPOP-2480:
-------------------------------------------

divijvaidya commented on code in PR #1838:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/pull/1838#discussion_r1030522016


##########
docs/src/dev/provider/index.asciidoc:
##########
@@ -848,6 +848,14 @@ Server returns for a single request.  Again, this 
description of Gremlin Server'
 out-of-the-box configuration.  It is quite possible to construct other flows, 
that might be more amenable to a
 particular language or style of processing.
 
+It is recommended but not required that a driver include a `User-Agent` header 
as part of any web socket

Review Comment:
   There are users of TinkerPop which open one connection per request and 
hence, they are sensitive to handshake latency. Theoretically the latency 
incurred will be due to increased size of header (hence longer header parsing 
time from bytebuffer to Java object + longer time to send larger object over 
network). 
   
   If it is not trivial to calculate this, then we can ignore this since I 
believe there are larger bottlenecks in handshake than header parsing right 
now. 





> User agent for Gremlin drivers
> ------------------------------
>
>                 Key: TINKERPOP-2480
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-2480
>             Project: TinkerPop
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: driver, server
>    Affects Versions: 3.4.8
>            Reporter: Divij Vaidya
>            Priority: Minor
>
> Currently, a server does not distinguish amongst the different types of 
> clients connecting to it. This issue is to add a new feature to add user 
> agent field in the HTTP and WebSocket request header which could be used to 
> identify the specific client from which the request was made.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)

Reply via email to