Nikita, > We have a webapp that needs to support binary updloads from a remove > fat client: if our client crashes we'd like it to automatically "send" a > zipped log file to our web application. the delivered file would NOT be > stored in Tomcat server's file system - but inserted into db. > > Apparently our fat client can issue either a POST or a PUT request. The > client developer has a slight preference for PUT. I must admit to not > being familiar with HTTP PUTs - are there any downside to using PUTs > (aside from having to override doPut())?
I don't think your code will not be any different -- aside from having to override the doPut() method in your servlet. However, the HTTP spec has rules that are most strict when using PUT; you have to respect all of the content-* headers among other things, and are required to return a 501 NOT IMPLEMENTED if you do not support such options. The bottom line is that HTTP PUT appears to have a more robust set of options, but you really should implement them properly. HTTP POST will allow you to be a bit lazier in your implementation. -chris
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
