perf(nuxt): invalidate getRouteMeta cache on page contents change

[BobbieGoede]

🔗 Linked issue

❓ Type of change

• 📖 Documentation (updates to the documentation, readme or JSdoc annotations)
• 🐞 Bug fix (a non-breaking change that fixes an issue)
• 👌 Enhancement (improving an existing functionality like performance)
• ✨ New feature (a non-breaking change that adds functionality)
• 🧹 Chore (updates to the build process or auxiliary tools and libraries)
• ⚠️ Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)

📚 Description

Instead of using file contents as key, we cache the contents separately using absolutePath as key. While I'm not sure if there is much performance gained by not using large strings as keys, using the contents as key will add an entry on every file change, so with the current implementation the cache will keep on growing during development as old entries won't be removed.

(changed PR title to better communicate the change)

📝 Checklist

• I have linked an issue or discussion.
• I have added tests (if possible).
• I have updated the documentation accordingly.

[stackblitz]

Run & review this pull request in StackBlitz Codeflow.

[danielroe]

We definitely need to fix the ever-growing cache. But we can't cache based on the path as the path will stay the same even if the contents changes (e.g. if the user updates the meta and the site hot-reloads).

[BobbieGoede]

We definitely need to fix the ever-growing cache. But we can't cache based on the path as the path will stay the same even if the contents changes (e.g. if the user updates the meta and the site hot-reloads).

I know, this change uses a second cache to store the contents, if the contents have changed the metaCache entry is cleared.

This is still indirectly using contents to cache metaCache, but doing so by caching contents by absolutePath separately in pageContentsCache. This way the keys aren't large, but the bigger gain is not having the cache grow on every change, only compared on every change.

[danielroe]

Ahh. Great! That sounds like a good solution.

Will recheck it.

[BobbieGoede]

I thought I had those flaky scroll to top tests figured out 🤦 now it's failing in Ubuntu..