Comment by PunchyHamster
1 day ago
Well, because it is more code. Current caching software caches by headers + query string. It now needs to be expaned to cache by body too.
It feels very pointless and there is no drawback of just using POST
1 day ago
Well, because it is more code. Current caching software caches by headers + query string. It now needs to be expaned to cache by body too.
It feels very pointless and there is no drawback of just using POST
There is: your browser or other type of client does not know it can repeat a POST request if it fails, whereas a QUERY request can be freely repeated in case of errors.
Not freely. It is idempotent, not safe. So it still can have serious load consequences.
1 reply →
Is caching not the primary reason to use this over POST? You should never want to cache POST requests.
No. Being idempotent, it also lets the browser/client/reverse proxy retry it if it fails.
Technically a put or a patch is also idempotent. The benefits are idempotent and safe (and semantically appropriate). Post (generally) communicates something is changing whereas a query doesn't
2 replies →