Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

19652Re: [rest-discuss] Reactive REST

Expand Messages
  • Michael Schuerig
    May 19, 2014
    • 0 Attachment
      On Sunday 18 May 2014 23:55:29 Hubert A Le Van Gong wrote:
      > I don't quite follow why you think a permanent HTTP session is against
      > RESTful principles. Isn't the HTTP session management at a different
      > level (transport) than the actual resource management and the
      > stateless principles associated to it? In the same vein, would you
      > also consider one cannot define a RESTful service over persistent
      > HTTPS connections for instance?

      Persistent HTTPS connections as well as keep-alive persistent HTTP
      connections make for an interesting case. I do consider them as a kind
      of session state, although arguably not state of the application
      session, but rather session state in the transport layer. The
      justification, as far as I understand it, is that in this case being
      stateful is actually more efficient/scalable than being stateless,
      because establishing a new connection is more expensive than keeping an
      existing connection open for a short time, in case it can be reused by a
      later request.

      And the keep-alive time indeed is short. For HTTP (not sure about HTTPS)
      it is much less than 60s.

      The case of a persistent connection for receiving events from the server
      is different. Such a connection can't time out after a short time, is
      has to stay open while the client is running.

      Anyway, it is surely possible to say that REST is only concerned with
      the application layer and that session state at lower levels is none of
      its business.

      For reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_persistent_connection


      Michael Schuerig
    • Show all 14 messages in this topic