Live data from Hacker News

Blink: Intent to Remove: HTTP/2 and gQUIC server push

groups.google.com

141–142 of 142 posts

Re: Blink: Intent to Remove: HTTP/2 and gQUIC server push

#141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yea but unlike http2 push, server sent events were actually useful! You could use it super easily and by holding open a connection and pushing down little json or XML payloads you could build all sorts of things easily in JavaScript. I even saw super basic chat functionally built using two Iframes a form in one and the chat log pushed back from the server as a stream of valid but open ended HTML abusing how lax the b…

Most applications that use WebSockets should be using SSE instead, but WS has better mindshare, and SSE doesn't work in IE11.

SSE can be polyfilled to work in IE11. It can be implemented on top of XHR from ie7 or so onwards.

Some caching proxies struggle with it though, because they try to buffer an entire response before forwarding it. And it’s 1 way. For something like collaborative editing, crafting a POST request for every keystroke feels wasteful, though it works great in practice.

Re: Blink: Intent to Remove: HTTP/2 and gQUIC server push

#142
post #25

This is pretty funny. After all the fuss, turns out that server push isn't really useful. I'm half impressed that they are able to actually admit they were wrong (implicitly of course) by removing it. I can't say I'm surprised, either. I could never think of a reasonable use case for it. With the variety of streaming options available now, it really seems antiquated.

I will be very sceptical about all "real world usage" statistic claims from Google.

They’re one of very few companies in the world that are in the position to actually measure this.
Post reply on HN