Re: [Openjnlp-devel] New OpenJNLP User / Some Patches
Brought to you by:
kherr
From: Nathan M. <nm...@vi...> - 2002-11-19 20:14:00
|
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... |