On 02/02/2012 14:14, Costin Manolache wrote: > On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 3:33 AM, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote: > >> On 02/02/2012 10:05, Remy Maucherat wrote:
>>> Ok, I think your "light protocol" concept to group any "upgraded" >>> connections is appropriate. >> >> Agreed. I'll see if I can wrap this into the generic upgrade process I >> added as part of the WebSocket support. >> > > My concern with the current upgrade process added for WebSocket is that > it's very heavy > in memory use. That is what I was agreeing with. I meant that I'll see if I can turn the current heavy-weight upgrade process into a light-weight one. As I have said before, this is already on my to-do list. I'll bump it up and start on it now so you have something to work with in trunk. I can steal ideas of you along the way :). That way we can hopefully get something pretty quickly into trunk that works for WebSocket and SPDY. > I think it would be better to go the other way - and use the > LightProtoocl for WebSockets. Exactly. > If the app needs the original > Request/Response - we could > save them, but in most cases I don't think they'll be needed. I don;t see the need for that. Mark --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
