CSS中图像URL上的缓存中断是否会引起额外的请求? [英] Does a cache buster on an image URL in CSS cause an extra request?

问题描述

如果我在CSS中的一条规则中将缓存清除器添加到图片网址

If I add a cache buster to an image URL in one rule in my CSS

background: url(../img/sprite.png?version=20130205) no-repeat -75px -208px;

但同一CSS具有URL的其他版本，而没有缓存无效符

but the same CSS has other versions of the URL without the cache buster

background: url(../img/sprite.png) no-repeat 0 0;

是否会引起对sprite.png的另一个请求?

does that cause another request for sprite.png?

另外，如果浏览器首先解析了未缓存的URL，那么我会假定它显示了缓存的图像(如果有的话)，但是当涉及到缓存无效的版本时，它将请求该图像的新版本-我说对了吗?

Also if the browser parses the non-cache-busted URL first I'd assume it shows the cached image, if it has one, but will then request a new version of the image when it comes to the cache busted version - have I got it right?

推荐答案

是的，它将导致对图像的新请求.如果它是?，则将重新加载图像.

Yes it will cause a new request for the image. If it is ? the image will reload.

如果您不想发出新请求，请在示例中使用#

If you don't want to make new request use # in example

background: url(../img/sprite.png#version=20130205) no-repeat -75px -208px;

这篇关于CSS中图像URL上的缓存中断是否会引起额外的请求?的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！