Gentoo Archives: gentoo-portage-dev

From: Brian Dolbec <dolsen@g.o>
To: gentoo-portage-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] portage: HTTP if-modified-since and compression
Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2012 03:06:20
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] portage: HTTP if-modified-since and compression by Mark Kubacki
1 On Thu, 2012-08-02 at 21:57 +0200, Mark Kubacki wrote:
2 > Hi Zac,
3 >
4 > In one word: Great! I love your modifications. Thank you!
5 >
6 > Regarding functionality – there is still some room for more
7 > optimizations and more features. For example, if the local copy is no
8 > older than x seconds then there's no need to contact any remote
9 > server. Expect patches.
10 >
11 > As for the bug. As long as the "If-Modified-Since" header is sent
12 > Portage has done its job. Some servers use the header as "ETag"
13 > replacement and don't do the more costly greater-than comparison (see
14 > also [1]; TIMESTAMP_TOLERANCE should be a configuration option so
15 > users can set it to 0 now that the "mtime"-patch has been accepted).
16 > And, BaseHandler are chained automatically by "build_opener".
17 > Nevertheless, I will look into the whole issue the next days.
18 >
20 Mark, I did similar for the layman-2.0 code which has been running with
21 the header info for quite a while now. After it had been running for a
22 good amount of time I put in a request to infra for some usage stats.
24 The If-Modified-Since header does make a big difference for layman.
25 Now I just really need to make a good blog post with a few graphs of the
26 data.
27 You can view the results on this bug if your interested:
30 --
31 Brian Dolbec <dolsen@g.o>


File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] portage: HTTP if-modified-since and compression W-Mark Kubacki <wmark@×××××××××.de>