What is the difference between HTTP status code 200 (cache) vs status code 304?
I'm using the Google "Page Speed" plug-in for Firefox to access my web site.
Some of the components on my page is indicated as HTTP status:
200 200 (cache) 304
By Google's "Page Speed".
What I'm confused about is the difference between 200 (cache) and 304.
I've refreshed the page multiple times (but have not cleared my cache) and it always seems that my favicon.ico and a few images are status=200 (cache) while some other images are http status 304.
I don't understand why the difference.
UPDATE :
Using Google "Page Speed", I receive a "200 (cache)" for http://example.com/favicon.ico as well as http://cdn.example.com/js/ga.js
But, I receive a http status "304" for http://cdn.example.com/js/combined.min.js
I don't understand why I have two JavaScript files located in the same directory /js/, one returning a http status 304 and the other returning a 200 (cache) status code.
The items with code "200 (cache)" were fulfilled directly from your browser cache, meaning that the original requests for the items were returned with headers indicating that the browser could cache them (eg future-dated Expires or Cache-Control: max-age headers), and that at the time you triggered the new request, those cached objects were still stored in local cache and had not yet expired.
304s, on the other hand, are the response of the server after the browser has checked if a file was modified since the last version it had cached (the answer being "no").
For most optimal web performance, you're best off setting a far-future Expires: or Cache-Control: max-age header for all assets, and then when an asset needs to be changed, changing the actual filename of the asset or appending a version string to requests for that asset. This eliminates the need for any request to be made unless the asset has definitely changed from the version in cache (no need for that 304 response). Yahoo! has more cache-related performance guidelines, which include making sure that ETags are correctly configured.
200 (cache) means Firefox is simply using the locally cached version. This is the fastest because no request to the Web server is made.
304 means Firefox is sending a "If-Modified-Since" conditional request to the Web server. If the file has not been updated since the date sent by the browser, the Web server returns a 304 response which essentially tells Firefox to use its cached version. It is not as fast as 200 (cache) because the request is still sent to the Web server, but the server doesn't have to send the contents of the file.
To your last question, I don't know why the two JavaScript files in the same directory are returning different results.
This threw me for a long time too. The first thing I'd verify is that you're not reloading the page by clicking the refresh button, that will always issue a conditional request for resources and will return 304s for many of the page elements. Instead go up to the url bar select the page and hit enter as if you had just typed in the same URL again, that will give you a better indicator of what's being cached properly. This article does a great job explaining the difference between conditional and unconditional requests and how the refresh button affects them: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ieinternals/archive/2010/07/08/technical-information-about-conditional-http-requests-and-the-refresh-button.aspx
链接地址: http://www.djcxy.com/p/7958.html上一篇: 脚本获取URL列表的HTTP状态代码？