From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 204CC13800E for ; Fri, 3 Aug 2012 03:06:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E855CE07B7 for ; Fri, 3 Aug 2012 03:06:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BC96E07B9 for ; Fri, 3 Aug 2012 01:30:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.210] (unknown [24.86.176.233]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: dolsen) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 991F91B402D for ; Fri, 3 Aug 2012 01:30:01 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <1343957371.28838.64.camel@big_daddy.dol-sen.ca> Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] portage: HTTP if-modified-since and compression From: Brian Dolbec To: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2012 18:29:31 -0700 In-Reply-To: References: <5019D1B7.5050807@gentoo.org> <5019E686.5030407@gentoo.org> Organization: Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-rO56sm0pZL8QE/RkTbBp" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.3 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Archives-Salt: 656bd38f-4ca4-4170-8baa-4559bd09634d X-Archives-Hash: 7609ea4254ef4c88fb7eaa5c0ebbea86 --=-rO56sm0pZL8QE/RkTbBp Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, 2012-08-02 at 21:57 +0200, Mark Kubacki wrote: > Hi Zac, >=20 > In one word: Great! I love your modifications. Thank you! >=20 > Regarding functionality =E2=80=93 there is still some room for more > optimizations and more features. For example, if the local copy is no > older than x seconds then there's no need to contact any remote > server. Expect patches. >=20 > As for the bug. As long as the "If-Modified-Since" header is sent > Portage has done its job. Some servers use the header as "ETag" > replacement and don't do the more costly greater-than comparison (see > also [1]; TIMESTAMP_TOLERANCE should be a configuration option so > users can set it to 0 now that the "mtime"-patch has been accepted). > And, BaseHandler are chained automatically by "build_opener". > Nevertheless, I will look into the whole issue the next days. >=20 Mark, I did similar for the layman-2.0 code which has been running with the header info for quite a while now. After it had been running for a good amount of time I put in a request to infra for some usage stats. The If-Modified-Since header does make a big difference for layman. Now I just really need to make a good blog post with a few graphs of the data. You can view the results on this bug if your interested: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D398465 --=20 Brian Dolbec --=-rO56sm0pZL8QE/RkTbBp Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAABAgAGBQJQGyl7AAoJECIU2QoBTxfLWRAIAL3VT6EnSrCsdxV/mSknhxAY /yWXX+dxbQI/q6YE113mFZCl9tk9aKWe7VVKtaWP9IdO/MXnFfOE3H77s24zoeUJ awh4sjypDKJ50Y73DpwS6Jl5q/ijrnL3nJXbFN0uF8Xls1oBRn5d4SpHLM1stY2d l77IJ7jXrwAXXIqZh5z3nafyjs2dFPb69NryQiRudVXPPbKTJObAPKu9MGBCe9OU 25PGKqfn/DIUurneBJroeX7L+mQB3Jbbp20KI95gdS0K3R6Zo/F1t+6TRGvhxWtE P833u2lL1IAc389SweeceRyVf4kc3CMXvqOTuE1Z76bAJokdfeSMg+5QY+nOoy8= =1Rr9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-rO56sm0pZL8QE/RkTbBp--