Re:Google Fonts Analytics
by btown on Wednesday February 19, 2020 @02:46PM
(#22369281)
Practically there's no difference between a browser that lazily downloads builtin fonts, and a global URL for a font file across websites with an extremely long TTL. And you don't want the browsers to be even more bloated than they already are!
[ Parent
| on HN ]
> font file across websites with an extremely long TTL.
Caches are no longer shared across domains because doing so leads to privacy leaks: https://www.jefftk.com/p/shared-cache-is-going-away
-
The parent comment's point is that this cache is partitioned by frame origin (which the link details).
Then why are there 36 trillion requests?
A lot of people using a lot of fonts from a lot of different browsers. I'm sure the caching techniques aren't perfect but they're probably quite good.
It's been a while now, but at one point there were some numbers that came in that showed that a much higher fraction of user agents arrive at a web site with a completely empty cache [than you might expect].
Enough so that if you rely on caching for user experience, your average user is not going to have a good time.
Re:Google Fonts Analytics
by BiteCode_dev on Wednesday February 19, 2020 @04:28PM
(#22370288)
There is a HUGE difference:
- not all sites use CDN, even if using the same font
- not all sites use the same CDN
- users clear the cache (clearing history does that on firefox)
- incognito mode is a thing
- first load matters a lot
- browser have a limit of the disk space they use for cache, and they evict older entries when they reach it. Given sites are now bloated, this fills up fast.
- this repeats for each browser. I have 5 on my laptop, 3 on my mobile, 2 on my tablet.