Re: [PATCH] Add rack.after_reply functionality

[Eric Wong <e@80x24.org>]

Blake Williams <blake@blakewilliams.me> wrote:
> 
> > In the past, I've used response_body.close in middleware for
> > similar things, and nowadays Rack::BodyProxy exists in rack, too.
> > 
> > So I'm a little skeptical if this is actually needed, but it's
> > probably too late to do anything about:
> 
> The first approach we took uses Rack::Events, which I believe is using
> Rack::BodyProxy under the hood. We ran into an issue where all but
> the last line of the response is written and the connection isn’t
> actually closed yet when the callbacks are called.

OK.  Keep in mind this can be server-dependent since unicorn
can't support persistent connections while (most?) other servers
do (and they may disable TCP_CORK or Nagle, etc).

> > Citation(s) needed.  Also, are there any proposal(s) to get this
> > into the Rack specification?
> 
> Not that I’m aware of. But I agree that it and early_hints could both be
> good additions to the spec.

By "Citation(s) needed", can you list some other (preferably
well-known) Rack servers which also implement this feature?

We wouldn't want current unicorn users thinking we're adopting
random new things which nobody else supports :>

Thanks.