RE: Multiple request blocking

> On Fri, Jul 06, 2001, Chemolli Francesco (USI) wrote:
> > > cachable (current
> > > > model)
> > > > c) Never
> >
> > We could just have later requests wait until enough is known
> > (which maybe is what we're doing now). I agree with Andres
> > that joining without knowledge is a Bad Thing(tm).
> > Or, we could introduce something like CPU pipelining.
> > We optimistically join, but as soon as we can determine whether
> > the request can be shared (i.e. after getting HTTP headers from
> > the origin) we add an extra check and if it can't share we
> > un-join and start a new request.
>
> ..if you've started sending data to the second client.. :)

The point is in WHERE you wait :). No argument that SOMEWHERE you have to
wait.

-- 
	/kinkie