Did you know that you can cache rendered outputs from stateless includes and improve your build times with a plugin..?
The plugin is called jekyll-include-cache and is whitelisted for use at GHP
(just not bundled by default, since its dangerous for novices)
The plugin can be used to cache any "include" that does not change its output from page-to-page.
Such includes can simply be plain HTML without any Liquid or an include that only references the global constant {{ site }} e.g., src/_includes/footer.html
I did not submit a PR because I thought I'd gather your feedback first and allow you to implement it first-hand so that you know where it can be used and where it should not be used..
Results from --profile on my system show that you may be able to shave of ~15 seconds but I may be wrong..
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I'm guessing at most 15-20s.. Also, you can gain more time by avoiding unnecessary fragmentation.
For example, inserting the contents of related.html include into post layout will free Jekyll from having to parse and render the include each time the post layout is rendered (exactly 1002 times according to output from --profile)
Of course, the above observation would be futile if related.html was being included in more than one layout.
Did you know that you can cache rendered outputs from stateless includes and improve your build times with a plugin..?
The plugin is called jekyll-include-cache and is whitelisted for use at GHP
(just not bundled by default, since its dangerous for novices)
The plugin can be used to cache any "include" that does not change its output from page-to-page.
Such includes can simply be plain HTML without any Liquid or an include that only references the global constant {{ site }} e.g., src/_includes/footer.html
I did not submit a PR because I thought I'd gather your feedback first and allow you to implement it first-hand so that you know where it can be used and where it should not be used..
Results from
--profile
on my system show that you may be able to shave of ~15 seconds but I may be wrong..The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: