Discussion in 'other software & services' started by snowbound, Jul 23, 2011.
How do you configure cache size? I can't find it in menu anywhere.
Normally Chrome's cache size is dynamic ie: it'll just keep growing based on how much space you give it (I've heard of it taking over 1GB of space.)
You can limit the cache size using these command line
I'll admit i'm a little surprised it isn't a simple option like on the other browser's i've used.
Users shouldn't be able to easily change cache size. They usually completely misunderstand how caching works in browsers.
Or maybe users who actually want to change the settings should be allowed. Most average users I know would not even look to change it. So who is missing out really? Those who use the option or those who don't?
I have a serious issue with this setting not being adjustable without command parameters. I don't need all that activity on my SSD drive. I changed the location of the cache as well as tweaked the size.
As much as I like Chromium, I think the only reason the cache is not in the GUI to change is because without it, Chromium is just another browser when it comes to speed.
Because users will misunderstand the cache and change it. Look at Firefox. You have hundreds of guides online offering ways to speed the program up and quite a few of those "tweaks" can actually slow things down/ hurt browsing in other ways.
Cache management should be left up to developers/ the program.
Though I do think an "about:flags" setting would be appropriate. Still, hardly a priority considering most people really don't ever need to be touching it.
If I had an SSD I personally would not bother moving my cache. SSD's are fairly durable these days, the danger of microwrites does not really scare me too much anymore. A few years ago I would have felt differently. And cache access speeds will be much better on a SSD.
edit: And Chrome's speed has very little to do with caching and much more to do with the V8 engine.
@Sully: I don't think speed tests load cached websites, and shows Chrome near or at the top.
I do agree this is something that should be part of browser settings.
Regarding SSD drives, I disagree. They do have a finite lifespan, period. Whether I will see that in 1 year or 5 years, it is hard to say, but one thing is certain, caches of any kind including swap files have a large amount of writes compared to most other activities. To me, it makes sense to put those things on another drive, since it is easy to do.
Regarding speed of Chromium and cache, why is it a concern if a user messes up cache settings if it has no relationship to the browser speed? That seems illogical to me Mr. Spock.
I have messed with my cache settings a lot. Maybe a browser test shows things differently, but my little eyeballs spidey senses were dull when my cache was small or nonexistent, not tingling like they are most of the time using Chromium.
Everything has a finite lifespan... so do magnetic HDD's. I think they both typically average 6 years at this point.
Caches use a lot of micro-reads/writes. This is going to add wear to your SSD. I personally don't think it's enough wear to not screw it up. There's never actually been any tests showing that using a browser cache/ different size cache/page file significantly decreases the time your SSD lasts.
Never said it doesn't effect browser speed. I said that the reason it's faster than other browsers does not have to do with caching. All modern browsers have caching.
EDIT: It's your computer. Do with it what you like. If you feel you're better off turning the cache off or moving it, by all means go for it. But I don't believe changing the cache should be easily accessible to users because most users just don't know what to do with it and if you give them the chance they'll break something.
I assume you do know the purpose of a cache for a browser.
1. the speed of a browser is directly related to its cache, not in terms of how fast it is able to render a page, but in terms of how fast it does render the page
2. other than having to fetch data to render a page, what exactly is it that you think someone will screw up if they mess with thier cache? The only thing one can modify really is size and location
You must know something I don't about the cache and how it effects things.
Normal HDDs have moving parts - bearings and motors. The heads ride on a layer of air just barely above the platters. They generate heat. They are prone to wear and tear like other machinery.
SSD drives, unless I am way off base, are not mechanical like that (I haven't torn one apart like I have normal HDDs). The life of such a drive is dictated by how many writes it can handle in the memory chips. It may not be required, but the investment of such high $$ to GB ratio to me is a big deal. Therefore, it makes sense to get the most out of my investment.
I've seen people completely remove their cache. I've seen people (way back long time ago) tell Firefox (3.4 at the time? can't remember) to use GB's of Cache. Why? Because they figured they were speeding things up.
Your program and its developers have the cache set a certain way. There's often very little (no) reason to assume you know more than the developers of the program.
The fact is that you're using a SSD and you feel that micro-reads/writes are a legitimate threat to its health. A lot of people (probably the majority) would agree with you. I certainly agree that they'll degrade the life in some way -- that's just not my point. My point is that certain parts of programs should not be easily customizable.
You should go by Mystery Man lol. You certainly are a mystery. You say one thing and say another thing, but which is it? Should you have an option, regardless of whether you need it or not? Or should you just use what the developers put in place, because they know best?
Wow! Now thats a pretty big statement to make, isn't it? There is no reason at all that I should assume to know more than the developers. I never knew that
Maybe I am not the tarpest shack in the pile, but it sure looks to me like you don't mind doing your own thing in your big list of security, yet you chide me because I wouldn't mind deviating from what the developers had in mind. Somehow, I think if you had a need/desire to modify your cache, it would be on your list, and would then be something that the developers didn't do right.
Yep, nothing like a good mystery.
I'm not chiding you, I have no idea why you think that. I think twice now I've explained that it's your computer and that you can do what you like with it. edit: I even went so far as to say that most people (including myself) would agree that you're doing something beneficial to your computer.
When I say "you" I mean the typical end user. The typical end user should have no reason to be messing with cache settings and yet many MANY articles have been written about "speeding up firefox."
I'm not a typical user. You are not a typical user.
As for many of your points based on my security setup, I hope you realize the huge difference. I did not have to edit some config file/ use a command line/ look up a guide on how to install that software. Windows makes it incredibly easy to change UAC (just an example of many of the things you pointed out) for a reason.
However, you don't see Windows giving you a nice GUI for changing folder/ file integrity. Why? Because the typical user will think "Hey! Let me lower the integrity for every folder/file! Then I'll be secure!" and instead they make it a bit more difficult and definitely not as accessible to the layman.
In fact every single thing on that list is "a dev setting" because the devs made it VERY easy and VERY accessible to change those settings/ install that software. The only one that's arguable is that I've disabled some services, though even then you get a nice fancy GUI for it.
edit: Again, you seem to be completely misunderstanding what I'm saying. I don't care about you disabling the cache, go right ahead, I'm sure you know how to use your computer just fine and if you don't... none of my business. But the cache settings should remain hidden (though I would add an about:flags perhaps... maybe not) because almost every single user should be discouraged from changing the cache settings.
edit2: To further clarify: Changing your theme in Chrome from the "Default" would not be some horrible thing just because it's not the default. Disabling the sandbox would be. When the devs allow customization, customize. When they don't, don't. That's how it goes for MOST users. Obviously you and I both agree that SSD's can see some wear caused by microwrites.
Separate names with a comma.