On Fri, 21 May 2021 at 16:26, Johann Koenig <johann...@google.com> wrote:So for Subframes there is a bit of a gap:> Back/Forward Cached Page: http://a.com:35019/iframe_cross_site.html
> Back/Forward Cached Page: http://b.com:35019/title1.html
> Back/Forward Cached Page: http://c.com:35019/title1.htmlb.com and c.com should be, maybe, Back/Forward Cached Subframe:? Working on that now. Subframes also have this handy bar that visually attaches them to the parent frame. Having that for the BFcache pages might be nice.Regarding SiteInstance URL vs the current one, the SiteInstance URL is just the TLD+1 and protocol. Since the pages were not as visibly attached to the active pages as subframes are, I thought having the full URL would make it easier for users to understand where they were coming from. However, if they look more like the subframes and have a bar attaching them to the active tab, then it makes more sense to use just the SiteInstance URL.Maybe this is what you meant but I would expect subframes of a bfcached page to be attached to the bfcached page not the active tab,FOn Fri, May 21, 2021 at 12:56 PM Charlie Reis <cr...@google.com> wrote:Thanks! I'm excited that these rows will be shown in the task manager.I like both "Back/Forward Cached Page" and activating the tab on double click. Would we say "Back/Forward Cached Subframe" if it's an OOPIF in the bfcache?One other question: the screenshot seems to indicate that the full URL is shown on the row? For Subframe processes, we currently show the SiteInstance's site URL instead, IIRC. Would you want to do that to be consistent and have a shorter string to display? (One caveat: I may have to change that value as part of the SiteInstanceGroup work in https://crbug.com/1195535, but whatever the new approach is could be applied consistently for subframes and bfcache.)CharlieOn Thu, May 20, 2021 at 3:55 PM Johann Koenig <johann...@google.com> wrote:Thanks for the discussion! It sounds like the consensus is:- Rename the current "Back/Forward Cache Tab:" to "Back/Forward Cached Page:"- Keep the double click behavior (switch to the tab the page is associated with)Is there anything else that needs to be addressed before this can be merged?On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 12:29 AM Avi Drissman <a...@google.com> wrote:Are we naming those entries differently? If we don't, then I'm afraid users are going to be concerned that pages are shown there that aren't visible. "Cached tab:"?Yes, they are currently labeled as "Back/Forward Cache Tab", but per discussion Tab will become Page.On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 11:23 AM Ahmed Fakhry <afa...@google.com> wrote:+1 to naming them differently.I'm not sure what the preferred behavior for double-clicking on a BFCache row should be. If there is a tab associated with it like you said, then it's probably fine to activate it.That sounds reasonable. It makes it easy to check which tab the cached page is associated with.On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 8:16 AM Kouhei Ueno <kou...@google.com> wrote:On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 12:15 AM Alexander Timin <alt...@chromium.org> wrote:Thanks for starting the discussion and the screenshots — they are quite helpful!One particular case that is interesting is the case when an active page and a bfcached page will share the process (which will happen quite often as we are using the same process on same-site navigation).In that case we simply will have two distinct rows - one for the bfcached page and one for the active tab.Yes, this is the same as the cross-site behavior. Since the Task Manager is creating new entries based on RenderFrameHosts, anything that creates a RFH for the new page and caches the previous one will show up in the same way.On Thu, 20 May 2021 at 08:48, 'Fergal Daly' via bfcache-dev <bfcac...@chromium.org> wrote:On Thu, 20 May 2021 at 16:33, Kouhei Ueno <kou...@google.com> wrote:On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 4:25 PM 'Fergal Daly' via bfcache-dev <bfcac...@chromium.org> wrote:On Thu, 20 May 2021 at 16:14, 'Johann Koenig' via bfcache-dev <bfcac...@chromium.org> wrote:Hi Ahmed,Since you are the OWNER for chrome/browser/task_manager, I was hoping to get your feedback on this.For crbug.com/992861 we would like to include pages in the Back/Forward cache in Task Manager. Pending change: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/2899822For background, Back/Forward Cache keeps RenderFrameHosts alive when you navigate away from them. If you return, it makes for a much faster loading experience. They are associated with the same WebContents, which makes some things tricky (like retrieving the Title or Favicon for the cached page).Currently they are not accounted for in the Task Manager. The change above fixes that, but now we have extra entries in the Task Manager and we are not sure what the behavior should be when double clicking on an entry. Currently the change does not override Activate(), so it will switch to the tab that the entry is associated with. If Activate() is overridden with an empty function, double clicking will not have any effect.Also, should it be displayed differently? E.g. subframes are labelled as such, perhaps bfcached frames should be labelled too,We are already labelling as such. "Back/Forward Cache Tab: ...".Oh cool, although I think that wording is a bit odd, since it's not a tab, maybe "Back/Forward Cached Page/Subframe",+1 to using "page" instead of "tab" here (as the actual tab stays the same).Sure thing, will update to "Back/Forward Cached Page"--F--F--What is the preferred behavior? Other ideas include a popup or tooltip describing BFCache, but I'm not sure if there are any existing examples to reference.Screenshot:
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "bfcache-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bfcache-dev...@chromium.org.
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/bfcache-dev/CAE%3DFoMSMp-qxKWoDjv%2BfUEsCyrdsxE701p5jDmX5xDD3CGJ2YQ%40mail.gmail.com.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "bfcache-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bfcache-dev...@chromium.org.
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/bfcache-dev/CAAozHLkNhN__hy5pXaWiXf9ku-wHdHHyntC9Yr69i_9XH-8iHw%40mail.gmail.com.
--kouhei
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "bfcache-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bfcache-dev...@chromium.org.
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/bfcache-dev/CAAozHLn1rX9ESBmCCWtzo7SAJ2Hc4-o12AZhvuJ6Ze59wvSFUQ%40mail.gmail.com.
--kouhei
[Moving to my chromium.org address since this is already on bfcache-dev, and adding site-isolation-dev]Thanks, but I should clarify something that probably isn't clear: the task manager doesn't show a subframe row for every frame in a page, or even every OOPIF. It shows one subframe row for each SiteInstance containing OOPIFs in a page. Thus, a page like A(B1, B2) will show:Tab: A_TitleSubframe: B_SiteURLIt will not show:Tab: A_TitleSubframe: B1_URLSubframe: B2_URLIs the bfcache logic behaving similarly, or will it attempt to show every subframe and/or OOPIF? That's one reason I asked about the URL vs site URL, since not every URL will be shown.