On Mon, 2006-01-23 at 16:27 -0800, Craig McClanahan wrote: > On 1/23/06, Frank W. Zammetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Craig McClanahan wrote: > > [snip] > > > > Calling flush() doesn't necessarily cause the *entire* response to be > > > sent, because you might still be creating more output. But it *does* > > > cause the HTTP headers, and any output content you've written to be > > > transmitted. From the perspective of the servlet API, this response > > > has now been "committed" so you cannot later decide to do a redirect > > > or forward. > > > > > > In general, the only use case I can think of for calling flush() > > > yourself is if you have something like a "Request In Progress - Please > > > Wait" at the beginning of your page, and you want that to show to the > > > user while a time-consuming process is performed to create the > > > remainder of the content. > > > > Interesting... I would have thought just the opposite, but this makes > > sense. I suppose one could imagine a problem with a filter that does > > some post-processing occurring if you flush() yourself. > > > > Yah, I suppose that's a potential use case, but I've never needed it.
If someone were to write such a filter, they should override flush() in the wrapped response. -Max --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]