Possibilities to cache Chrome extension scripts and assets
601 views
Skip to first unread message
Alexander
Aug 6, 2020, 9:09:10 AM8/6/20
to Chromium Extensions
Hello, I would like to cache chrome extension files (eg. Fonts, scripts, icons),
but the http response:
url: chrome-extension: //<extension-id>/image.png
url: chrome-extension: //<extension-id>/image.png
Cache-Control: no-cache
Neither through the manifest, nor even through the webRequest.onBeforeSendHeaders it is possible to enable the file cache.. serviceworker cache not working with chrome-extension scheme too
if there are any options at all to do this?
if not, is it possible to add such capability for chrome extensions in the future?
wOxxOm
Aug 6, 2020, 10:16:28 AM8/6/20
to Chromium Extensions, Alexander
Caching is not needed for chrome-extension:// resources as they are local files and hence are as fast as any cached files. Well, usually, at least. There could be some improvement in case the browser profile is on a network drives. Also, admittedly, the *in-memory* caching is faster. However, there should be no difference in any realistic usage scenario because decoding/parsing phase takes much longer usually.
If you can demonstrate the need for caching by providing a demo extension, it might be reconsidered. Personally, though I doubt it because usually bottlenecks in such cases are caused by something else.
Alexander
Jan 13, 2021, 6:05:34 PM1/13/21
to Chromium Extensions, wOxxOm, Alexander
As example on this two screenshots:
first: 280ms to load image from local chrome-extension://
and at second screenshot 0ms to load image from memory cache
right now i can't contain wallpapers locally because loading is slow and only way to cache is upload local recource through https proxy, but it's awful at all..
четверг, 6 августа 2020 г. в 17:16:28 UTC+3, wOxxOm:
Alexander
Jan 14, 2021, 3:56:43 AM1/14/21
to Chromium Extensions, Alexander, wOxxOm
I can send you build where you could check local resources vs memory cache, the difference significant
четверг, 14 января 2021 г. в 01:05:34 UTC+2, Alexander:
Jackie Han
Jan 14, 2021, 4:30:10 AM1/14/21
to Alexander, Chromium Extensions, wOxxOm
Could show waterfall details?
"Time" column is not accurate, because it includes "Stalled" time especially when you have many resources to load.
But memory cache just tells you "0ms".
Local files are not as fast as memory caching, but it is still very fast. See my screenshot below.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chromium Extensions" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chromium-extens...@chromium.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/chromium-extensions/b794672d-3059-45b5-8552-5122d2a51a9dn%40chromium.org.
韩国恺(Jackie)
wOxxOm
Jan 14, 2021, 5:18:19 AM1/14/21
to Chromium Extensions, Jackie Han, Chromium Extensions, wOxxOm, Alexander
Also note that to analyze performance properly the entire page load process should be measured in devtools profiler or chrome://tracing. Not just the resources. It's also quite possible there's a bug or an inherent slowness in filesystem protocol handling. Anyway, it's best to report on https://crbug.com with a demo extension attached.
Homey
Jan 14, 2021, 6:03:00 AM1/14/21
to Chromium Extensions, Jackie Han, Chromium Extensions, wOxxOm, Alexander
Jackie Han,
Sure! here are the waterfall details and video with user tests comparison
Sure! here are the waterfall details and video with user tests comparison
четверг, 14 января 2021 г. в 11:30:10 UTC+2, Jackie Han:
Jackie Han
Jan 14, 2021, 7:28:51 AM1/14/21
to Homey, Chromium Extensions, wOxxOm, Alexander
Hi Homey,
<html>
<body>
<img src="image.jpg"> <!-- test jpg format -->
<!-- Or test webp format <img src="image.webp"> -->
</body>
</html>
From the information you provided, I think of a similar situation I encountered in the past. So, let me say my guess based on my experience.
1. If your image is very large (large file size and/or large resolution, e.g. 5000x3000), Chrome will have a noticeable delay to display the image.
2. When you upload images to a CDN provider, by default, CDN providers will compress the picture enormously(hugely) to speed up network transmission. After that compression, the picture has become very small and the resolution has been reduced. Thus Chrome will display it quickly.
Could you compress your background image to a smaller size, and test it again?
Another suggestion, remove all other resources, just only test image load speed, like this:
<html>
<body>
<img src="image.jpg"> <!-- test jpg format -->
<!-- Or test webp format <img src="image.webp"> -->
</body>
</html>
Best
韩国恺(Jackie)
Jackie Han
Jan 14, 2021, 7:34:33 AM1/14/21
to Homey, Chromium Extensions, wOxxOm, Alexander
Also, if you use URL.createObjectURL(blob) for a large image as the image.src attribute, it also has noticeable delay.
韩国恺(Jackie)
Message has been deleted
Homey
Jan 14, 2021, 7:52:37 AM1/14/21
to Chromium Extensions, Jackie Han, Chromium Extensions, wOxxOm, Alexander, Homey
I uploaded it without any compression as file on my web server: https://api.homey-app.online/wallpapers/lighthouse.jpeg (3375x2250)
and use just file url "filesystem:chrome-extension://..."
---
Alexander
Homey
Jan 14, 2021, 8:19:31 AM1/14/21
to Chromium Extensions, Homey, Jackie Han, Chromium Extensions, wOxxOm, Alexander
right now it's impossible optimize loading speed of local files, only by upload them to https
but with scripts it's impossible regards policy and security issues
четверг, 14 января 2021 г. в 14:52:37 UTC+2, Homey:
Jackie Han
Jan 14, 2021, 8:30:21 AM1/14/21
to Homey, Chromium Extensions, wOxxOm, Alexander
In my test, reducing the file size can reduce loading time a bit.
I don't know "filesystem:chrome-extension://..." , I use "chrome-extension://..." .
韩国恺(Jackie)
Jackie Han
Jan 14, 2021, 8:38:35 AM1/14/21
to Homey, Chromium Extensions, wOxxOm, Alexander
I test localhost://image.jpeg vs chrome-extension://extension_id/image.jpeg
It seems there is no difference in speed.
On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 9:19 PM Homey <silves...@gmail.com> wrote:
韩国恺(Jackie)
Homey
Jan 14, 2021, 8:41:21 AM1/14/21
to Chromium Extensions, Jackie Han, Chromium Extensions, wOxxOm, Alexander, Homey
ok, no matter filesystem: or just chrome-extension:// , the same problem, crop size can give some optimization, but unfortunately not solving a problem,
possibility to add crome-extension:// to memory-cache via service worker could solve this problem,
possibility to add crome-extension:// to memory-cache via service worker could solve this problem,
may be chrome will implement it some time.. or i just dont know ways to optimize it
четверг, 14 января 2021 г. в 15:30:21 UTC+2, Jackie Han:
guest271314
Jan 14, 2021, 9:08:32 AM1/14/21
to Chromium Extensions, silves...@gmail.com, Jackie Han, Chromium Extensions, wOxxOm, Alexander
Since the file is local you can utilize File System Access API (Native File System) to get the local image without using networking at all.
Homey
Jan 14, 2021, 9:16:55 AM1/14/21
to Chromium Extensions, guest...@gmail.com, Homey, Jackie Han, Chromium Extensions, wOxxOm, Alexander
yes, this issue about: local access working much slower than using networking with cache
четверг, 14 января 2021 г. в 16:08:32 UTC+2, guest...@gmail.com:
guest271314
Jan 14, 2021, 9:52:15 AM1/14/21
to Chromium Extensions, silves...@gmail.com, guest271314, Jackie Han, Chromium Extensions, wOxxOm, Alexander
Why is networking necessary at all? Since the file is local you can get th image without networking
const [fileHandle] = await self.showOpenFilePicker();
const file = await fileHandle.getFile();
const file = await fileHandle.getFile();
guest271314
Jan 14, 2021, 9:55:40 AM1/14/21
to Chromium Extensions, guest271314, silves...@gmail.com, Jackie Han, Chromium Extensions, wOxxOm, Alexander
If networking is required to get the file you can use <link rel="prefetch">
guest271314
Jan 14, 2021, 10:04:35 AM1/14/21
to Chromium Extensions, guest271314, silves...@gmail.com, Jackie Han, Chromium Extensions, wOxxOm, Alexander
Homey
Jan 15, 2021, 5:36:53 PM1/15/21
to Chromium Extensions, guest...@gmail.com, Homey, Jackie Han, Chromium Extensions, wOxxOm, Alexander
Wow! <ink rel="preload"> significantly increased performance. It's exactly what looking for, thank you!
четверг, 14 января 2021 г. в 17:04:35 UTC+2, guest...@gmail.com:
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages