Thanks, I have similar workaround on my side. The problem is that we have more objects instantiations for every data frame. Isn't it too expensive?
On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 1:00 PM Simone Bordet <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 10:06 PM, Simone Bordet <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Sergey Mashkov > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> yes, I am sure. See a gist with the test case: > >> > >> https://gist.github.com/cy6erGn0m/68582925c042436b84bb135a5b9858f0 > > > > Ah, HTTP/2 transport. > > Can you quickly try with the HTTP/1.1 (default) transport to see if > > the behavior is as expected ? > > If HTTP/1.1 works as expected, please file an issue. > > > > I think the multiplexing/flow control needed in HTTP/2 breaks the > > semantic of the AsyncContentListener, and that would be a bug. > > It is indeed a bug. > https://github.com/eclipse/jetty.project/issues/790 > > -- > Simone Bordet > ---- > http://cometd.org > http://webtide.com > Developer advice, training, services and support > from the Jetty & CometD experts. > _______________________________________________ > jetty-users mailing list > [email protected] > To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe > from this list, visit > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jetty-users >
_______________________________________________ jetty-users mailing list [email protected] To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jetty-users
