Does anyone have context on jdk.httpserver?

[Robert Engels]

Ok, based on this I don’t think VT (virtual threads) related structure and performance improvements make sense. If you can’t do the other elements you’re forced to use a different implementation anyway and the performance issues can be addressed there. 

Thanks for the feedback. 

Robert

> On Jan 8, 2025, at 2:04 AM, Alan Bateman <alan.bateman at oracle.com> wrote:
> 
>  On 07/01/2025 15:18, robert engels wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I would like to revisit this. I have signed the OCA for another PR I worked on - I believe it covers all of my contributions.
>> 
>> The websockets license looks to be very permissive. But it seems like this is something Oracle could reach out to the authors to resolve.
> 
> The simple HTTP server in the JDK was never meant to be a fully featured and high performance server. Instead it's meant for very simple usages, so think getting started, the rite of passage to serve up a file, and local testing. If someone wants a production ready server then there are dozens to choose from.
> 
> So I think highly questionable as to whether it's worth putting any time into adding websockets or HTTP/2 support.
> 
> 
>> I could also simply create a whiteroom ws impl, as I did for the http2 support - it’s a pretty small surface api.
>> 
>> I am more than willing to work on this, but I need to know what the feasibility is of it actually being included.
>> 
>> Even if the work was limited to “better support for vt”, some of the changes are more extensive (like the SSL handling).
> There may be a few small things that would make sense to bring to net-dev to discuss. I assume "vt" means virtual threads so if there is some issues there then bring them to the mailing list to get some agreement that they are worth doing.
> 
> -Alan.