unofficial mirror of bug-guile@gnu.org 
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
To: Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com>
Cc: 21093@debbugs.gnu.org, guile-devel@gnu.org
Subject: bug#21093: Web server: response bodies systematically loaded in memory
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 10:58:21 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87r3bn7yky.fsf__1484.19924448735$1466758777$gmane$org@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <874m8jhuj7.fsf@pobox.com> (Andy Wingo's message of "Fri, 24 Jun 2016 10:15:40 +0200")

Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com> skribis:

> On Mon 20 Jul 2015 00:10, ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>
>> The ‘sanitize-response’ procedure systematically loads the whole
>> response body in memory, which causes obvious scalability issues (this
>> is in 2.0.11.)
>>
>> In particular, when a request handler returns a port-taking procedure as
>> its second return value, ‘sanitize-request’ will just call that
>> procedure passing it a string output port.
>>
>> This procedure should instead be called from the server implementation’s
>> ‘write’ hook, but that would necessitate an API change.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>
> How would you set the Content-Length?  Just leave it off and set
> Connection: close ?  Set it in the headers perhaps?  Then you have to
> verify later, which I dunno how nice that is.  Maybe it is OK.

I think it could work this way:

  1. By default, provide no ‘Content-Length’ and force chunked encoding
     (so that the recipient can make sure it received everything.)

     This is useful for data generated on the fly.

  2. Provide an optional mechanism allowing the user to specify the
     content length upfront.

     Useful for statically-generated data that cannot fit in memory.

I haven’t thought yet about the actual API (I’ll be happy to do so as
time permits; to be clear, I don’t consider it a 2.0.12 blocker.)

Ludo’.





      reply	other threads:[~2016-06-24  8:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-07-19 22:10 bug#21093: Web server: response bodies systematically loaded in memory Ludovic Courtès
2016-06-24  8:15 ` Andy Wingo
2016-06-24  8:58   ` Ludovic Courtès [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='87r3bn7yky.fsf__1484.19924448735$1466758777$gmane$org@gnu.org' \
    --to=ludo@gnu.org \
    --cc=21093@debbugs.gnu.org \
    --cc=guile-devel@gnu.org \
    --cc=wingo@pobox.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).