Comments on: reinventing the wheel http://journal.paul.querna.org/articles/2007/03/20/reinventing-the-wheel/ more cloud power Thu, 29 Jul 2010 18:45:36 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Nicole http://journal.paul.querna.org/articles/2007/03/20/reinventing-the-wheel/comment-page-1/#comment-165 Nicole Thu, 22 Mar 2007 16:54:34 +0000 #comment-165 This is where I nod my head and vaguely smile. This is where I nod my head and vaguely smile.

]]> By: webvictim http://journal.paul.querna.org/articles/2007/03/20/reinventing-the-wheel/comment-page-1/#comment-164 webvictim Tue, 20 Mar 2007 09:21:11 +0000 #comment-164 Just thought I'd point out that your .c file is actually named "mu<b>tli</b>get.c" rather than "multiget.c" - I presume this is due to large workloads and long days rather than intentional! <p><br /> That said, it does make me imagine Apache as a sort of "Dick Dastardly" character in the <a href='http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wacky_Races' rel="nofollow">Wacky Races</a>, with his faithful hound "<b>mutli</b>get" sitting in the passenger seat, cackling away at the misfortune of his opponents... perhaps my imagination is too vivid! <p><br /> "Double drat!" Just thought I’d point out that your .c file is actually named “mutliget.c” rather than “multiget.c” – I presume this is due to large workloads and long days rather than intentional!

That said, it does make me imagine Apache as a sort of “Dick Dastardly” character in the Wacky Races, with his faithful hound “mutliget” sitting in the passenger seat, cackling away at the misfortune of his opponents… perhaps my imagination is too vivid!

“Double drat!”

]]> By: Paul Querna http://journal.paul.querna.org/articles/2007/03/20/reinventing-the-wheel/comment-page-1/#comment-163 Paul Querna Tue, 20 Mar 2007 09:07:48 +0000 #comment-163 <p>Patrick: Yes, My preference would be to introduce a new HTTP Method (MULTIGET?) to enable it to be a cachable idempotent request, rather than re-using POST. </p> <p> However, in my use-case, most of this data is already sending cache-busting headers, for various other reasons, so while in the purest HTTP-person mode, I totally agree making it non-cachable sucks, but in the 'real world' use case I'm prototyping this for, its not useful. </p> Patrick: Yes, My preference would be to introduce a new HTTP Method (MULTIGET?) to enable it to be a cachable idempotent request, rather than re-using POST.

However, in my use-case, most of this data is already sending cache-busting headers, for various other reasons, so while in the purest HTTP-person mode, I totally agree making it non-cachable sucks, but in the ‘real world’ use case I’m prototyping this for, its not useful.

]]> By: Patrick Mueller http://journal.paul.querna.org/articles/2007/03/20/reinventing-the-wheel/comment-page-1/#comment-162 Patrick Mueller Tue, 20 Mar 2007 07:03:43 +0000 #comment-162 bye, bye, cache-able GETs! Did I see something in WebDAV that did multi-gets? Perhaps that's another alternative. bye, bye, cache-able GETs! Did I see something in WebDAV that did multi-gets? Perhaps that’s another alternative.

]]> By: Craig Fairhurst http://journal.paul.querna.org/articles/2007/03/20/reinventing-the-wheel/comment-page-1/#comment-161 Craig Fairhurst Tue, 20 Mar 2007 05:30:35 +0000 #comment-161 Certainly a difficult problem well tackled, although while in this prototype stage it does seem a little ineffective. Not sure if I'd use it as of yet but I'm sure as hell going to play with it :P Certainly a difficult problem well tackled, although while in this prototype stage it does seem a little ineffective.

Not sure if I’d use it as of yet but I’m sure as hell going to play with it :P

]]>