Odi,
Can you give me more details as to why you think this may cause problems with HTTP
pipelining? I am a bit skeptical, as the approach I outlined simply follows the
recommendation of the HTTP spec:
quote
8.2.2 Monitoring Connections for Error Status Messages
An HTTP/1.1 (or later) client
Kalnichevski, Oleg wrote:
Can you give me more details as to why you think this may cause problems with HTTP pipelining?
It won't if done right :-) You just need to make sure that you are
monitoring the response corresponding to the request and not any other
response from previously pipelined
Can you shed any light on the different behavior in Windows vs
HPUX? Not that it will change anything, but I like to learn why these things
behave the way they do to prevent future time wasting activities.
I have had no exposure to HPUX of what so ever, so I may only be guessing here. I
This problem seems like it is the perfect candidate for the
ExpectContinueMethod.setUseExpectHeader() function. Isn't this exactly
the scenario for which this header was intended?
-Eric
Oleg Kalnichevski wrote:
Siddhartha,
I believe the solution to this problem is trivial. All it takes is
that is correct unfortunately I have had the
privilege to work on a webserver which is supposed
to be 1.1 compliant..
I am trying hard to get them to support the 100-expect
continue at the same time I want to see if I can get a
work around.. and hence the mails!!
--- Kalnichevski, Oleg
[EMAIL
Hi Oleg. Welcome back.
I think we also need to add commons-codec to project.xml.
Mike
On Jan 6, 2004, at 3:18 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25264.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
