[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Massive Content-Type definition ideas & Gopher

1993-06-08 07:24:10
On Tue, 08 Jun 1993 07:50:05 EDT, you said:
Certainly, compression seems very attractive if you ignore the costs it
incurs and only look at the costs it saves.

There is cpu and wall time spent [de]compressing, there is decreased
interoperability, there is increased complexity in the protocol; all these
things have costs, too.

A very true point.  However, I think it's just a *touch* hubristic
for us to decide what the break-even point is, especially absent
any clear-cut technical merit (for example, the exact reasons why
the working group declared nested encodings A Bad Thing). 

Of course, having decided against nested encodings for valid but
arcane reasons, this forced us into placing what at first seem to
be arbitrary restrictions on message/partial.  What comes around, goes around.

In any case - do any of us have a working crystal ball, so we can
see what the relative balances of CPU cost, disk space, network 
bandwidth, backward compatibility, and all....

                                Valdis Kletnieks
                                Computer Systems Engineer
                                Virginia Tech