5

I've been thinking about creating the simplest possible cache solution and would like to know if this is a worthwhile option.

Using the outstanding cacheflag plugin, I place the entire layout wrapper template inside these tags:

{% cacheflag flagged "content" globally using key craft.request.path %}
 ... lots o code....
{% endcacheflag %}

In the back end, I flag each of the section with a "content" flag.

I think by doing this, each url should have it's own cache file. And all caches are cleared whenever a new entry is posted.

Granted it may a bit of a sledgehammer style solution, but if traffic is average it could perhaps be effective?

Is my understanding correct or is this a bad idea?

Improve this question

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
2

In my opinion it's a good, easy and fast way to caching content. We use similar solutions on different Websites and it works perfect for us. Maybe you should do a more specific flagging to avoid deleting all cached entries at once. And you should take care about possible dynamic code parts like forms.

Improve this answer
2
  • Thanks for the feedback! Have you had any issues with image transforms in your caching approach?
    – mjr
    Jun 16, 2016 at 13:41
  • Jep, we had once some issues with image transforms. We used generateTransformsBeforePageLoad => true in our general config and sometimes (not traceable) the image transform was not created. Changing back to the default generateTransformsBeforePageLoad => false fixed this problem. The Craft caching is clever and stores the cache only if no temporary transform url is in the content.
    – Tom Bauer
    Jun 17, 2016 at 7:25

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.