When NOT to use this status (common misuses)
Returning 200 for partial failures or errors embedded only in the body.
Clients and monitors treat it as success; failures become silent and harder to alert on.
Returning 200 for creation instead of 201 with Location.
Clients lose a reliable created-resource identifier; SDK behavior becomes inconsistent.
Returning 200 for async acceptance instead of 202.
Clients assume the work is complete and proceed incorrectly.
Returning a response body with 204.
Some clients/proxies mis-handle it; connection reuse and serializers can break.
Critical headers that matter
Content-Type
Defines how clients parse the body.
Clients mis-parse payloads; SDKs and browsers apply wrong decoding.
Cache-Control
Controls cacheability and revalidation.
CDNs/browsers cache dynamic data or fail to cache static content.
ETag / Last-Modified
Enables conditional requests and revalidation.
Unnecessary bandwidth; poor cache consistency.
Content-Length
Should typically be 0 for no-body responses.
Some clients wait for bytes or mis-handle connection reuse.
FAQ
Should clients retry on HTTP 204?
Usually no—treat it as a successful final response unless your domain requires revalidation.
Is HTTP 204 cacheable?
Only if Cache-Control/validators allow it. Do not assume cacheability from the status alone.
Which headers matter most for HTTP 204?
Content-Type and Cache-Control are the baseline. Some codes also require Location, WWW-Authenticate, or Retry-After.
How does this affect monitoring?
Monitors usually mark success; use payload/latency checks for correctness.
How does this affect crawlers/SEO?
SEO impact is driven mostly by cacheability, canonical stability, and content correctness.
What should error responses include?
If a body is returned, keep it consistent and typed via Content-Type.