/lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2010-March/025645.html

https://github.com/whatwg/whatwg.org · HTML · 93 lines · 80 code · 6 blank · 7 comment · 0 complexity · 6eec5e383fb08cad1bbde83a127caa25 MD5 · raw file 

    

  1. <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
    2. 

  2. <HTML>
    3. 

  3.  <HEAD>
    4. 

  4.    <TITLE> [whatwg] WebSocket bufferedAmount includes overhead or not
    5. 

  5.    </TITLE>
    6. 

  6.    <LINK REL="Index" HREF="index.html" >
    7. 

  7.    <LINK REL="made" HREF="mailto:whatwg%40lists.whatwg.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5Bwhatwg%5D%20WebSocket%20bufferedAmount%20includes%20overhead%20or%20not&In-Reply-To=%3C25B3A097-14D5-433C-B6EE-3F7281645B51%40gmail.com%3E">
    8. 

  8.    <META NAME="robots" CONTENT="index,nofollow">
    9. 

  9.    <META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
    10. 

  10.    <LINK REL="Previous"  HREF="025643.html">
    11. 

  11.    <LINK REL="Next"  HREF="025644.html">
    12. 

  12.  </HEAD>
    13. 

  13.  <BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff">
    14. 

  14.    <H1>[whatwg] WebSocket bufferedAmount includes overhead or not</H1>
    15. 

  15. <!--htdig_noindex-->
    16. 

  16.     <B>Perry Smith</B> 
    17. 

  17.     <A HREF="mailto:whatwg%40lists.whatwg.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5Bwhatwg%5D%20WebSocket%20bufferedAmount%20includes%20overhead%20or%20not&In-Reply-To=%3C25B3A097-14D5-433C-B6EE-3F7281645B51%40gmail.com%3E"
    18. 

  18.        TITLE="[whatwg] WebSocket bufferedAmount includes overhead or not">pedzsan at gmail.com
    19. 

  19.        </A><BR>
    20. 

  20.     <I>Fri Mar 26 14:18:53 PDT 2010</I>
    21. 

  21.     <P><UL>
    22. 

  22.         <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="025643.html">[whatwg] WebSocket bufferedAmount includes overhead or not
    23. 

  23. </A></li>
    24. 

  24.         <LI>Next message: <A HREF="025644.html">[whatwg] WebSocket bufferedAmount includes overhead or not
    25. 

  25. </A></li>
    26. 

  26.          <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> 
    27. 

  27.               <a href="date.html#25645">[ date ]</a>
    28. 

  28.               <a href="thread.html#25645">[ thread ]</a>
    29. 

  29.               <a href="subject.html#25645">[ subject ]</a>
    30. 

  30.               <a href="author.html#25645">[ author ]</a>
    31. 

  31.          </LI>
    32. 

  32.        </UL>
    33. 

  33.     <HR>  
    34. 

  34. <!--/htdig_noindex-->
    35. 

  35. <!--beginarticle-->
    36. 

  36. <PRE>
    37. 

  37. On Mar 25, 2010, at 4:50 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
    38. 

  38. 

  39. &gt;<i> It seems that the consensus is now leaning towards changing the spec  
    40. 

  40. </I>&gt;<i> again
    41. 

  41. </I>&gt;<i> to include the overhead, but I haven't changed it yet because I  
    42. 

  42. </I>&gt;<i> don't want
    43. 

  43. </I>&gt;<i> to be flip-flopping back and forth -- if we change this, I don't  
    44. 

  44. </I>&gt;<i> want to
    45. 

  45. </I>&gt;<i> change it back. I think the use cases I know of are addressed  
    46. 

  46. </I>&gt;<i> whether we
    47. 

  47. </I>&gt;<i> include overhead or not, so from an objective perspective I don't  
    48. 

  48. </I>&gt;<i> think it
    49. 

  49. </I>&gt;<i> really matters, which makes this more of an opinion thing. I'd  
    50. 

  50. </I>&gt;<i> encourage
    51. 

  51. </I>&gt;<i> anyone else with an opinion on this to make their opinion known.  
    52. 

  52. </I>&gt;<i> (Yes, I'm
    53. 

  53. </I>&gt;<i> actually _asking_ for people to suggest colours for this bikeshed!)
    54. 

  54. </I>
    55. 

  55. As an author, I'd rather not know about the overhead.  To me it would  
    56. 

  56. be confusing to queue up 10 bytes and ask for bufferedAmount and get  
    57. 

  57. back 15.
    58. 

  58. 

  59. The sample scripts are doing one of two things.  Either they are  
    60. 

  60. trying to prevent saturating the network and they are doing this by  
    61. 

  61. testing for bufferedAmount being equal to zero.  Or, they are trying  
    62. 

  62. to saturate the network given the existing interfaces.  I believe  
    63. 

  63. there are other options to allow the application to maintain an  
    64. 

  64. asynchronous interface and achieve saturation that would consume less  
    65. 

  65. cpu overhead.  I'm not sure if we want to open that can of worms in  
    66. 

  66. this thread or not.
    67. 

  67. 

  68. pedz
    69. 

  69. 

  70. </PRE>
    71. 

  71. 

  72. <!--endarticle-->
    73. 

  73. <!--htdig_noindex-->
    74. 

  74.     <HR>
    75. 

  75.     <P><UL>
    76. 

  76.         <!--threads-->
    77. 

  77. 	<LI>Previous message: <A HREF="025643.html">[whatwg] WebSocket bufferedAmount includes overhead or not
    78. 

  78. </A></li>
    79. 

  79. 	<LI>Next message: <A HREF="025644.html">[whatwg] WebSocket bufferedAmount includes overhead or not
    80. 

  80. </A></li>
    81. 

  81.          <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> 
    82. 

  82.               <a href="date.html#25645">[ date ]</a>
    83. 

  83.               <a href="thread.html#25645">[ thread ]</a>
    84. 

  84.               <a href="subject.html#25645">[ subject ]</a>
    85. 

  85.               <a href="author.html#25645">[ author ]</a>
    86. 

  86.          </LI>
    87. 

  87.        </UL>
    88. 

  88. 

  89. <hr>
    90. 

  90. <a href="http://lists.whatwg.org/listinfo.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org">More information about the whatwg
    91. 

  91. mailing list</a><br>
    92. 

  92. <!--/htdig_noindex-->
    93. 

  93. </body></html>
    94.