Bug 14751
| Summary: | Inspector should advise to add an Expires: header to static resources | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | WebKit | Reporter: | Adam Roben (:aroben) <aroben> |
| Component: | Web Inspector (Deprecated) | Assignee: | Nobody <webkit-unassigned> |
| Status: | RESOLVED WORKSFORME | ||
| Severity: | Enhancement | CC: | apavlov, ap, timothy |
| Priority: | P2 | Keywords: | InRadar |
| Version: | 523.x (Safari 3) | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | All | ||
| URL: | http://jeremy.zawodny.com/blog/archives/009272.html | ||
Adam Roben (:aroben)
<http://jeremy.zawodny.com/blog/archives/009272.html> explains how adding the Expires: HTTP header to static resources can reduce network requests. The Inspector should suggest this for resources that don't already have this header. Probably some heuristic for determining which resources "seem like they would benefit" is needed so we don't blindly suggest this for everything. At a minimum, we shouldn't suggest this for obviously dynamic resources (like *.php)
| Attachments | ||
|---|---|---|
| Add attachment proposed patch, testcase, etc. |
David Kilzer (:ddkilzer)
Any image resource with a "?" in its URL should not have this suggestion.
Alexey Proskuryakov
Would this recommendation be reliable enough? My understanding is that there are a lot of resources that are supposed to be verified with If-Modified-Since often, and following this recommendation would cause unexpected results when they actually change.
In the comments to the aforementioned article, I found a link to a more in-depth treatment of the subject: <http://www.thinkvitamin.com/features/webapps/serving-javascript-fast>.
Adam Roben (:aroben)
<rdar://problem/5712847>
Alexander Pavlov (apavlov)
This type of recommendations is now provided in the Audits panel.
Alexander Pavlov (apavlov)
Fix resolution status as advised by AP