Browser cache size?

[Tinky]

I have both Firefox and Internet Explorer on my PC, is there an ideal size to limit the cache/s to? Or does it matter what size they are?

[heero_yuy]

Originally Posted by Tinky

I have both Firefox and Internet Explorer on my PC, is there an ideal size to limit the cache/s to? Or does it matter what size they are?

It's a balance: If your net connection is slower than the HDD access then using a bigger cache speeds things up. I've only got a 10meg access but find that a 50 meg cache in Firefox is adequate.

When I'm mobile and using a very limited 2G link then a bigger cache speeds things up once you've visited pages. From scratch there's no real difference as the page load time is limited by the connection assuming you flush the cache(s) when the browser is closed.

Makes no significant difference if you're using streamed content like youtube IMO.

HTH

[Tinky]

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

It's a balance: If your net connection is slower than the HDD access then using a bigger cache speeds things up. I've only got a 10meg access but find that a 50 meg cache in Firefox is adequate.

When I'm mobile and using a very limited 2G link then a bigger cache speeds things up once you've visited pages. From scratch there's no real difference as the page load time is limited by the connection assuming you flush the cache(s) when the browser is closed.

Makes no significant difference if you're using streamed content like youtube IMO.

HTH

Thanks for that Heero, I'm afraid it does not make a lot of sense to me. My Firefox cache is set at 299MB and IE at 250MB which seems an awful lot of space. Since my speed rarely exceeds 2MB is these figures acceptable? I would have thought it would slow down my browsing speed no?

[heero_yuy]

Originally Posted by Tinky

Thanks for that Heero, I'm afraid it does not make a lot of sense to me. My Firefox cache is set at 299MB and IE at 250MB which seems an awful lot of space. Since my speed rarely exceeds 2MB is these figures acceptable? I would have thought it would slow down my browsing speed no?

TBQH I'd try running with a smaller setting, say 100MB, and see if you see any real difference. It can be quite subjective but really depends on your browsing habits, PC and connection speed. At this moment I'm only using the old lappy in the kitchen for browsing with a small 50M cache. I'm only on the poverty 10mb 'M' VM BB but seems OK.

If you rapidly shift between pages/sites then the cache is of limited use, if you stay in one place it will help.

You can test the effectivenes of the cache in FF by forcing it to flush by hitting F5. (Possibly <CTRL> F5) and then reloading the page. Then you'll see how long the page/site takes to load from scratch so you can compare the difference.

[Tinky]

Hi Heero once again thanks for that. Tried what you suggested with the F5 button and strangely in Firefox there is no discernable difference, but doing the same with IE after reducing the cache size, appears to load quicker. Very i-n-t-e-resting. Gosh there's some clever folk on here!

[tizmeinnit]

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

It's a balance: If your net connection is slower than the HDD access then using a bigger cache speeds things up. I've only got a 10meg access but find that a 50 meg cache in Firefox is adequate.

When I'm mobile and using a very limited 2G link then a bigger cache speeds things up once you've visited pages. From scratch there's no real difference as the page load time is limited by the connection assuming you flush the cache(s) when the browser is closed.

Makes no significant difference if you're using streamed content like youtube IMO.

HTH

you should hope your hard drive is faster than your net connection. You will be in trouble if your HDD only accesses at 12 MB which matches VMs 100 meg

[heero_yuy]

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

you should hope your hard drive is faster than your net connection. You will be in trouble if your HDD only accesses at 12 MB which matches VMs 100 meg

It's not the instantaneous access time nor the transfer rate of the HDD that comes directly into play here: The cache holds thousands of small files each containing a bit of information that may or may not be part of the page that the browser is trying to display. Not all elements in the cache can be used to construct the page as some information almost always has to be retreived from the connection anyway.

How fast the cache can be searched and the data retrieved vs the actual connection speed is the trade off. This will be dependant upon how well constructed the search and retreive code is and the organisation of the cache structure. If a large number of random accesses need to be made the HDD will be slow. Think file fragmentation. This is verses the server which has the whole page in a buffer and is sending it as fast as the link allows.

No surprises that M$ code is likely to be poor in this respect here as Tinky has found.

[tizmeinnit]

I was joking

[heero_yuy]

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

I was joking

Sometimes I miss those.