Cache state: partial content about fetch

[mayhemer]

Not sure what is the question here. Is the "cache mode" from this bug title the cache mode on fetch?

[annevk]

Sorry, I messed up the title, this is about a related feature: https://fetch.spec.whatwg.org/#concept-response-cache-state And also how we should deal with partial content cache entries overall within Fetch.

[mayhemer]

it's not entirely clear to me how to deal with partial content. Does us handling that mean we also pay special attention to a 206 response? What's the logic here, if we notice we have a partial cache entry, we set If-Range, then if there's a 206 response, we combine some stuff and hand out the combined response as a 200 to content?

Exactly. We always hand out a 200 (on a new 200 server response -> cache state "none", or a 206 response from the server that we, as you say, combine -> cache state "partial" or could well be "validated" since 206 is mostly the same as 304. But depends. I kinda don't see a use case right now for the "partial" state, tho)

Does this only happen for media elements basically?

No, this can happen for anything, large HTML, CSS whatever. The response just needs to fulfill some conditions to be "resumable". I don't think you need to be concerned about it tho.

[wanderview]

Some IRC discussion of what we do in gecko's http cache:

12:13 PM [valentin] mayhemer: bkelly asked: do you know if our http cache does anything special for range requests? are they automatically combined together or anything?
12:14 PM [mayhemer] we only support caching partial content in range <1-N> where N is anything between 1 and content-length
12:14 PM [mayhemer] when we have sych a partial entry (for N < content-length)
12:14 PM [mayhemer] we do an If-Range request and merge, invisibly to the consumer of nsIChannel
12:15 PM [mayhemer] - (we merge on 206)
12:15 PM [mayhemer] - (we refetch on 200)
12:15 PM [mayhemer] - (we report any server error otherwise)
12:15 PM [mayhemer] bkelly: ^^
12:16 PM [mayhemer] note that not all content is resumable so in few cases we throw any partial cached data as soon as the interruption occurs
12:17 PM [bkelly] mayhemer: thanks!
12:50 PM → sworkman and jduell joined
1:01 PM [annevk] mayhemer: I guess we don't merge if the Content-Length doesn't match or they're not equally fresh?
1:01 PM [mayhemer] annevk: :) we send out conditinal a header, so it's either an entity match or not
1:01 PM [mayhemer] nothing so primitive as Content-Length matching!
1:02 PM [mayhemer] the server responses with either 206 and sends what we don't have (or what we have asked for with Range: header)
1:02 PM [mayhemer] or the server responses with 200 and a whole new content and ETag
1:04 PM [mayhemer] we also match via Last-Modified if available (ETag preferred)
1:04 PM [mayhemer] no ETag and no Last-Modified (+some more conditions) and we don't cache at all when interrupted (there is no way to do a conditinal If-Range request anyway)
1:05 PM [mayhemer] annevk: ^ does it explain?
1:05 PM [annevk] mayhemer: that helps, I was also interested in the refetch clause earlier
1:06 PM [mayhemer] refetch clause? I'm not familiar with that term
1:06 PM [annevk] "(we refetch on 200)"
1:06 PM [mayhemer] aha!
1:06 PM [mayhemer] on 200 we just throw away the content previously cached
1:07 PM [annevk] but we don't hit the server again?
1:07 PM [mayhemer] and just replace with a whole new content (from the start)
1:07 PM [mayhemer] hm?
1:07 PM [annevk] refetch sounds like we'd do another network request (called fetching elsewhere)
1:07 PM → bholley joined ([email protected])
1:07 PM [mayhemer] ok, so, we can have 3 states of the cache (very generally):
1:07 PM [mayhemer] 1. no cached entry
1:08 PM ⇐ bholley quit ([email protected]) Quit: Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com
1:08 PM [mayhemer] 2. only a partial entry <0 - N>, N < content-length
1:08 PM [mayhemer] 3. full entry
1:08 PM [mayhemer] in case 2 we definitely have ETag or Last-Modified
1:08 PM [mayhemer] in case 3 we may or may not to, for simplicity assume we do
1:08 PM [mayhemer] so, request is made
1:08 PM [mayhemer] we look at the cache
1:09 PM [mayhemer] in case 1 we just go to the server with an ordinary request, only valid response may be 200 OK with the full content entity
1:10 PM [mayhemer] in case 2 we do a request with If-Range header that is filled with ETag (or Last-Modified when ETag is not avail) and a Range header with NNN-XXX where NNN is the first byte we want and NNN is the content length (I think..)
1:10 PM [mayhemer] a valid server response may be only 206 where the part we are missing is sent to us
1:11 PM [mayhemer] or a 200 where a whole new complete reponse content entity is sent to us (we replace any previously cached data)
1:11 PM [mayhemer] in case 3, it's similar, we send a request with If-None-Match: Etag
1:12 PM [mayhemer] and get only one of 304 - we server the cached content - or 200 we replace the cached content and download a new resource content entity
1:12 PM [mayhemer] annevk: ^ makes sense?
1:12 PM [annevk] yeah, so we only cache 200 / 206?
1:12 PM [annevk] do we update headers for 304?
1:13 PM [mayhemer] yep, we definitely update headers for 304 and 206 responses
1:13 PM [annevk] and, was part of your simplification above that we actually do have support for multiple independent ranges?
1:13 PM [mayhemer] we don't :(
1:13 PM [annevk] but we might some day?
1:13 PM [mayhemer] there were some requirements but nsHttpChannel cannot work with it right now
1:13 PM [annevk] okay
1:13 PM [mayhemer] we may, one day
1:13 PM [mayhemer] the cache itself can work with it
1:14 PM [annevk] to some extent all this affects fetch() as you may know and this has been hugely helpful
1:14 PM [mayhemer] but levels above (channels) cannot handle it
1:14 PM [mayhemer] annevk: always glad to help :)

[annevk]

Closing this in favor of #144 which is a bit more clear.