Skip to content

[Incremental Delivery RFC] Requirement on Content-Length #136

Closed
@ificator

Description

@ificator

I had a read through the proposal and it seems like Content-Length MUST be provided for each part. I'm curious as to why this is the case - is it simply because it makes client implementation easier? From a service perspective accomplishing this behavior requires buffering the result of serialization in memory before being written to the response stream, which can have a negative impact on performance in high-throughput services. It's much more efficient to serialize directly to the response stream, and let the clients rely on the boundary markers to determine if a part is complete.

This would necessitate a more complex boundary marker, as proposed by #135.

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions