Post Reply 
Can We Grab the images faster?
Oct. 03, 2004, 12:48 PM
Post: #1
 
Hi !

I was curious to know, whether we can create a header filter for grabbing the images, very similar to Grabbing the " Host " written by Jak?

Thanks
Garcot
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Oct. 03, 2004, 06:19 PM
Post: #2
 
garcot;
Quote:I was curious to know, whether we can create a header filter for grabbing the images, very similar to Grabbing the " Host " written by Jak?
This would be a rehash of this topic, would it not? Whistling

Remember, header filters won't contain the image itself, only the request for said image (outgoing), or the response to that request (incoming). That said, you can build a filter to determine if the request was answered successfully, or denied (as in 404), and you can capture that information to whatever format you desire, but you still don't have the image itself.

At this point, you know the image is coming (or not), but if you do anything else right now, you'll introduce delays into the page loading and/or rendering process. No benefit to that, is there? [angry]

So, if you're looking to have the image itself, then you should probably use elshaddai's filter for prefetching larger versions of thumbnail images, as shown in the above linked thread. Modify it to suit your own needs, of course.

In summary, header filters won't gain you any advantages over the regular web filters. Sorry 'bout that. Sad


Oddysey

I'm no longer in the rat race - the rats won't have me!
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Oct. 04, 2004, 01:04 AM
Post: #3
 
Thanks Oddysey.

Grab the Host header filter does not work as it gives an error when I open the log window and see the action. It is indicated in red.

Can you repost the right header filter for this?

Garcot
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Oct. 04, 2004, 08:14 AM
Post: #4
 
garcot;
Quote:Grab the Host header filter does not work as it gives an error when I open the log window and see the action. It is indicated in red.

Can you repost the right header filter for this?
I'm sorry, but did you just de-rail your own topic? Oh, the horror of it all! :o :P [lol]

Doesn't matter. I'd still try to help you, but I don't happen to have that particular filter in my set. Have you tried re-downloading it from this site? I think this is one of Jak's filters (yes, I mean the one and only Jak, of JakxPack Spoofer fame). Methinks he'd be a good person to ask about any errors you encounter within the filters he's written and released into the wild (that is, to you, me, and the rest of the UOPF members). If this isn't one of his filters, then perhaps we should ring sidki's chimes for help with your predicament.

"That's my story, and I'm stickin' to it!" Big Teeth © 1994, The Shoppe


Oddysey

I'm no longer in the rat race - the rats won't have me!
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Oct. 07, 2004, 12:28 AM
Post: #5
 
garcot,

See if this meets your needs. It was created by Jak with input by sidki. It works well for me

[HTTP headers]
In = FALSE
Out = TRUE
Key = "Host: Jakx Page Loader-Up'er(Out) test"
Match = "\1"
Replace = "\h$LOG(GJakx Loader-Up'er Grabbed this Host---> \1-->\h)"
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Oct. 07, 2004, 01:16 PM
Post: #6
 
Hi !

This filter gives an error outpout ( marked in red ) if u see the Log Window. Atleast it doesn't work in my case, as I am already on a 512 Kbps cable connection.

Thanks
Garcot
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Oct. 07, 2004, 01:54 PM
Post: #7
 
As Sidki and Jakx (among many others) both agreed to back when that filter was being discussed, the filter is USELESS!!!... It was a trial run that failed...
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Oct. 07, 2004, 02:31 PM
Post: #8
 
Thanks ProxRocks.

Does the HTTP 1.1 header contain the connection number also? I may have to refresh my TCP/IP fundamentals once again!

Should it form a new thread?

Garcot
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Oct. 07, 2004, 03:07 PM
Post: #9
 
garcot;
Quote:Does the HTTP 1.1 header contain the connection number also? .... Should [that be] a new thread?
No need to start a new thread, we can deal with your first question right here. Big Teeth

Which is to say.... No, the connection number isn't included in the header, it is strictly a local phenomonen. Proxo can pick it up (from the Network Transport Layer of the OS's network redirector), but the server doesn't need it in order to respond, so it isn't sent out at all.

After all, the connection is still open, right? (Unless it's timed out, or some other similarly undesirable action has occurred.)


Oddysey

I'm no longer in the rat race - the rats won't have me!
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Oct. 07, 2004, 03:28 PM
Post: #10
 
garcot;
ProxRocks Wrote:As Sidki and Jakx (among many others) both agreed to back when that filter was being discussed, the filter is USELESS!!!... It was a trial run that failed...
That would be because someone has captured the entire header (with the \1), and is then attempting to use the \h to extract a host name from that whole block of text. In technical terms, we programmers call this a romper room no-no. :P Use the $URL command within the Match to store just the URL to a variable, then use the \h to insert the host name into the replacement text. See the Help files for more info (although I don't see any examples, sorry to say - you'll have to figure it out on your own).

Oddysey

I'm no longer in the rat race - the rats won't have me!
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump: