<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Sebastian,<div><br><div><div>Am 03.10.2011 um 14:42 schrieb Sebastian Sastre:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; ">ok, for you a ~20-40% improvement in response times isn't an incentive appealing to do anything about it. </span></blockquote></div><br></div><div>how did you measure those numbers? Did you have keep-alive active? </div><div><br></div><div>With keep-alive there is only little more that is happening when doing this redirect scenario. One of the biggest latency factors is initiating a TCP connection. Most pages load quite a few images and such in parallel (today it is 4 concurrent connections or more). From that point the textual transfer of the form and the response shouldn't matter that much. With keep-alive especially that redirect scenario should be well supported. For everything else you need HTTP pipelining which is unfortunately still not used in todays browsers. </div><div><br></div><div>Norbert </div></body></html>