[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MRESOLVER-308?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17651314#comment-17651314
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on MRESOLVER-308:
------------------------------------------
cstamas opened a new pull request, #231:
URL: https://github.com/apache/maven-resolver/pull/231
Introduces 3 new transport: Jetty HttpClient 10.x, OkHttp 4.x and Java 11
HttpClient based ones. These are all HTTP/2 capable transports.
Also, some reshuffle around HTTP tests, made them reusable to be able to use
them in all HTTP based transports.
---
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MRESOLVER-308
> HTTP transport showdown
> -----------------------
>
> Key: MRESOLVER-308
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MRESOLVER-308
> Project: Maven Resolver
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: Resolver
> Reporter: Tamas Cservenak
> Priority: Major
>
> For HTTP protocol resolver currently provides following transports:
> * transport-wagon that uses Maven 2.x Wagon, that among other protocols
> supports HTTP/1.1 as well
> * transport-http that uses directly Apache HttpClient 4.x supporting
> HTTP/1.1 but provides enhancements in form of "checksum strategy" (almost all
> of remote repositories emit those in headers, sparing one HTTP round-trip)
> As we saw, is very easy to outperform these as:
> * Maven Central supports HTTP/1.1 but also HTTP/2
> * HTTP/3 is on the way as well
> An experiment involving Jetty Client far outperformed both of existing
> transports, most probably due HTTP/2 support.
> So, clients we should consider:
> * Jetty Client
> * OkHTTP
> * Java 11 HttpClient
> Point is, to invest into something that (ideally) transparently supports
> HTTP/1.1 and HTTP/2, and more ideal would be if even HTTP/3 would be
> transparently supported (Jetty 12 works on that). We could then simply
> compare these implementations, count in pros and cons, and decide where we
> want to go,
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
