[Seaside] [VW][7.6] Streaming?
boris at deepcovelabs.com
Mon Apr 21 21:33:53 UTC 2008
I appreciate the feedback Martin, the reason I brought it up is because
I upgraded to the latest-and-greatest 7.6 last week and ported to
Opentalk-Seaside at the same time. Figured might as well look into
streaming as there was some talk about it back when the project was
announced. I am not particularly missing anything given that we were on
a non-streaming server before, but it's certainly something I wouldn't
mind having if it were offered.
DeepCove Labs Ltd.
4th floor 595 Howe Street
Vancouver, Canada V6C 2T5
boris at deepcovelabs.com
This email is intended only for the persons named in the message
header. Unless otherwise indicated, it contains information that is
private and confidential. If you have received it in error, please
notify the sender and delete the entire message including any
> -----Original Message-----
> From: seaside-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org [mailto:seaside-
> bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org] On Behalf Of Martin Kobetic
> Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 2:18 PM
> To: Seaside - general discussion
> Subject: Re: [Seaside] [VW][7.6] Streaming?
> I have to admit I'm sooo not ready for this discussion, but I guess I
> better say something.
> First, when we were working on streaming integration with Seaside 2.8
> in August last year, Seaside 2.8 was nearing
> its release and it was quite late for any disruptive changes. So we
> to just hack our way through the problem and
> came up with an integration solution that we didn't like but seemed to
> working. We were planning to ship 2.8 with our
> hack-ish solution and revisit streaming later at a more opportune
> course, as we were nearing our VW7.6 freeze
> dates we found out the hack-ish solution still had some issues, and in
> end we decided to disable the streaming
> support altogether for the 7.6 release. Right now we're working to get
> Velocity 1.0 out and consequently didn't have
> time to look at Seaside 2.9 at all. So I feel completely unprepared to
> discuss this particular problem.
> However to say at least something more specific, IIRC one of the main
> problems we ran into was that the streaming
> support back in Seaside 2.8 was pretty much hardwired so that Seaside
> itself wanted to write the HTTP headers into the
> provided socket stream. That doesn't fit our server at all. The server
> designed to write the headers and only the
> message payload/body is the responsibility of whatever the application
> layer is. There are of course mechanisms provided
> to let the app-layer add headers it wants to send, but the actually
> writing of headers out on the socket is the server's
> job. Moreover Seaside's HTTP writing support is rather simplistic and
> didn't seem prepared to deal with any of the more
> complex issues, like writing the "quoted" encoding (e.g. ?iso-8859-
> 2?Q?....?, or the base 64 variant ?B?) for non-ascii
> header values, header field folding etc. So the hack we had was really
> suppressing all that in our server code and
> letting Seaside do its thing, as much as it could. I'm not sure
> the problems that lead us to disable
> streaming were due to Seaside's limited HTTP abilities or not.
> Either way we hoped to convince the Seaside folks that, rather than
> a bit here and bit there, Seaside should just
> stay away from HTTP writing/parsing as much as it can. So in the
> mode the desired set of headers should be
> handed over to the server upfront and then there should be a separate
> from the server back to Seaside to write just
> the streamed body into a provided socket stream. This may well be the
> direction that 2.9 already went, I don't know.
> There were more things we wanted to bring up, but I'll have to go back
> find out.
> Boris Popov wrote:
> > Ah, perhaps I misunderstood Michael then, I'll wait for
> > from Martin...
> > Thanks!
> > -Boris
> seaside mailing list
> seaside at lists.squeakfoundation.org
More information about the seaside