From:  Jason Duell <jduell@mozilla.com>
Date:  08 Jan 2016 02:23:08 Hong Kong Time
Newsgroup:  news.mozilla.org/mozilla.dev.tech.network
Subject:  

Re: devtools re-fetching problem

NNTP-Posting-Host:  63.245.214.181

Tom:

After talking to Honza and Michal some more, and given this:

> I think we cache resources whenever possible. no-store entries are kept
in memory and no-cache entries
> are never reused, but we have them for viewsource etc.

I think our next step is for you guys to try using LOAD_FROM_CACHE |
LOAD_ONLY_FROM_CACHE and see what % of your resources are/aren't in the
cache.  That will give us some baseline for understanding how big of an
issue we have here.

If you're around next Thursday at around 9:30 AM PST, you could also join
our necko conference call and we could talk synchronously, which might be
useful.

Jason


On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 11:53 AM, Honza Bambas  wrote:

> On 1/7/2016 15:50, Michal Novotny wrote:
>
>> On 12/20/2015 12:36 AM, Jason Duell wrote:
>>
>>> We can't cache the resources if the web server tells us "don't cache
>>>> this", so even if we use things such as LOAD_ONLY_FROM_CACHE, we still
>>>> need
>>>> a solution for that case.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>> I might be wrong, but I think we cache resources whenever possible.
>> no-store entries are kept in memory and no-cache entries are never reused,
>>
>
> no-cache entries are used and very often.  no-cache means to revalidate
> (do a conditional request) if possible (having LM/Etag).
>
> but we have them for viewsource etc...
>>
>>
>> How about forcing Gecko retain the original source text when devtools are
>>>> being used?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Sounds like we need something like a CACHE_GECKO_COPY flag that keeps a
>>> "secret" cache only for internal gecko use?
>>>
>>> 1) if the resource would normally be cached, does nothing (the resource
>>> gets cached normally)
>>> 2) If the resource wouldn't be cached, cache it (perhaps only in RAM?  Or
>>> maybe we'd need that only if INHIBIT_PERSISTENT_CACHING is set), with
>>> some
>>> sort of flag that indicates it should be invisible to cache reads unless
>>> CACHE_HIDDEN_COPY is again present.
>>>
>>
>> How does this differ from what we already do as described above?
>>
>> Btw, I think it's really hard to solve this on the cache level. Let's say
>> there is some no-cache, no-store resource which is different on every load.
>> We load it in 2 tabs so every tab has a different version.
>>
>
> A deferred cache storage would keep a storage per-tab (ideally). So, no,
> it would be separated between tabs.
>
> We would need to keep multiple different copies that we received from the
>> server. And how would devtools identify which one it wants?
>>
>
> As said above, docshell or chrome window would be the ident (holder of the
> deferred cache storage)
>
> -hb-
>
>
>
>> Michal
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dev-tech-network mailing list
>> dev-tech-network@lists.mozilla.org
>> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-network
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> dev-tech-network mailing list
> dev-tech-network@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-network
>



-- 

Jason