11–20 of 68 posts
>http2_push /static/css/main.css; Silly question, but what's the use case for the HTTP/2 Push? Their example with pushing doesn't make sense to me. Why would you want to push static content?
>http2_push /static/css/main.css; Silly question, but what's the use case for the HTTP/2 Push? Their example with pushing doesn't make sense to me. Why would you want to push static content?
Normally, the browser parses HTML, finds a tag that mentions main.css, and then requests main.css. With HTTP/2 push, by the time the browser has finished parsing the tag, main.css has already been delivered.
If the browser already has main.css in its cache, it can reject the push.
>http2_push /static/css/main.css; Silly question, but what's the use case for the HTTP/2 Push? Their example with pushing doesn't make sense to me. Why would you want to push static content?
Client: GET /index.html
Server:
Client (after parsing): GET /main.css
Server:
Client: GET /index.html
Server: , (PUSH)
The obvious problem with this scheme is that if the client already has main.css then it's a waste of bandwidth to send it again. The client can cancel the push, but by the time it finds out about it a bunch of data has already been sent. There is a proposal for 'Cache Digests' which will allow the client to send a Bloom filter of its cache so the server can tell whether or not it has the file already, but as far as I'm aware no major client or server has implemented this yet.
>http2_push /static/css/main.css; Silly question, but what's the use case for the HTTP/2 Push? Their example with pushing doesn't make sense to me. Why would you want to push static content?
gRPC + TLS in nginx will allow connections from outside that I'm comfortable with. Great improvement!
>http2_push /static/css/main.css; Silly question, but what's the use case for the HTTP/2 Push? Their example with pushing doesn't make sense to me. Why would you want to push static content?
That way, the web server can pro-actively push the named stylesheet to the client as it knows that the stylesheet is needed to render the page. That way the client doesn't have to ask the server (which would result in a new roundtrip).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://nginx.org/en/CHANGES-1.14 ^^^ Hard to find, though.
That just says: *) 1.14.x stable branch. which doesn't mean anything...
>http2_push /static/css/main.css; Silly question, but what's the use case for the HTTP/2 Push? Their example with pushing doesn't make sense to me. Why would you want to push static content?
That being said, I fail to see how in the general case, setting static headers in the server software's config for Push is useful [2][3], and wish that more implementations converged on a common way of describing what to push [4], so that tools could be built around discovering dependencies, and around interpreting that manifest to execute push.
[1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1K0NykTXBbbbTlv60t5MyJvXj... [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14077955#14081237 [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12719563#12722383 [4] https://github.com/GoogleChromeLabs/http2-push-manifest
>http2_push /static/css/main.css; Silly question, but what's the use case for the HTTP/2 Push? Their example with pushing doesn't make sense to me. Why would you want to push static content?
If you agree that using a CDN for static content is a good idea, then it would seem HTTP/2 Push is useless. The website is served from your servers while the static content is served from a CDN so you can't "push" it in the same stream as you webpage content. Am I missing something here?
[1]: Yet. I believe the web packaging standard (intended, among other things, to replace AMP) allows pushing bundles signed by other origins.