On Tue, 22 Dec 2020 14:40:55 -0800 Stephen <stephen at drsudo.com> wrote: > Is there some guarantee that a capsule writer has on what may _not_ be > cached, or is it entirely up to the client's discretion? If the latter, > is this something which could be clarified in the spec? My impression > from this ML was that caching is frowned upon (except for perhaps > navigating back and forth through your history), but this has not been > my experience (at least with amfora). It is at the clients discretion by my reading; it's not brought up at all in the spec. In general it's probably best for the client to avoid caching, at least by default. According to Stephane's statistics page?, most documents are typically rather small anyway (but perhaps some of the larger ones are more popular...) The main cost is establishing a connection and the TLS handshake, where the client and server have to do some back-and-forths and will spend a lot of time just waiting for responses. For this reason I personally prefer to use caching liberally, at least for the duration of my session. There are some applications that will break as a result, but I don't tend to use them myself. I think that no-caching-by-default should be suggested as a best practice in the best practices document. 1: gemini://gemini.bortzmeyer.org/software/lupa/stats.gmi -- Philip -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 488 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://lists.orbitalfox.eu/archives/gemini/attachments/20201223/59e8 4aef/attachment-0001.sig>
---
Previous in thread (4 of 13): 🗣️ Luke Emmet (luke (a) marmaladefoo.com)
Next in thread (6 of 13): 🗣️ Alex // nytpu (alex (a) nytpu.com)