Re: [Openjnlp-devel] New OpenJNLP User / Some Patches

[Nathan M. <nm...@vi...>]

On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 12:23:32PM -0600, Kevin Herrboldt wrote:
> On Tuesday, Nov 19, 2002, at 12:05 US/Central, Nathan Meyers wrote:
> [...]
> >I don't see how improving the cache implementation helps. To say that
> >you're caching something implies making an initial HEAD request to 
> >decide
> >whether to do a GET - a win for resources that are large and reasonably
> >static, a loss for everything else. In my case, it's a big loss for the
> 
> This is true if the caching mechanism is HEAD+GET. I should have been 
> clearer. I was thinking of switching the caching over to GET only using 
> the "If-Modified-Since" HTTP header, which should cause the server to 
> only send the contents of the requested resource if it's newer than 
> that header. This effectively turns GET into a HEAD request if OpenJNLP 
> has an up-to-date resource.

Thanks for the clarification. Yes... this makes sense.


> There are admittedly some issues with the logic of OpenJNLP and how it 
> parses JNLP files. There must be at least one too many attempts to load 
> the JNLP file.
> 
> >startup .jnlp document. And if you only do a GET, why bother caching a
> >result you'll never need again?
> 
> I'm not sure if you know this about JNLP, but if you don't want a JNLP 
> file cached you make sure the <jnlp> tag does not have an href 
> attribute. Somewhere in the JNLP specs this is documented, although 
> it's obscure.

I wasn't aware of this but I don't have that attribute anyway - it
doesn't make sense for a dynamically generated page. So it looks like
OpenJNLP isn't currently following this practice.

Nathan Meyers
nm...@vi...