用POST请求代替GET请求怎么样? (无论如何你应该……)

另一种方法是在生成ajax调用响应的代码中不提供来自服务器端的缓存头:

response.setHeader( "Pragma", "no-cache" );
response.setHeader( "Cache-Control", "no-cache" );
response.setDateHeader( "Expires", 0 );

用POST请求代替GET请求怎么样? (无论如何你应该……)

The real question is why you need this to not be cached. If it should not be cached because it changes all the time, the server should specify to not cache the resource. If it just changes sometimes (because one of the resources it depends on can change), and if the client code has a way of knowing about it, it can append a dummy parameter to the url that is computed from some hash or last modified date of those resources (that's what we do in Microsoft Ajax script resources so they can be cached forever but new versions can still be served as they appear). If the client can't know of changes, the correct way should be for the server to handle HEAD requests properly and tell the client whether to use the cached version or not. Seems to me like appending a random parameter or telling from the client to never cache is wrong because cacheability is a property of the server resource, and so should be decided server-side. Another question to ask oneself is should this resource really be served through GET or should it go through POST? That is a question of semantics, but it also has security implications (there are attacks that work only if the server allows for GET). POST will not get cached.

我个人觉得查询字符串方法比试图在服务器上设置头文件更可靠——不能保证代理或浏览器不会缓存它(有些浏览器比其他浏览器更差——没有命名)。

我通常使用Math.random()，但我不认为使用日期有任何错误(您不应该以足够快的速度执行AJAX请求来两次获得相同的值)。

Internet Explorer的Ajax缓存:你打算怎么做?提出了三种方法:

在查询字符串中添加一个缓存破坏令牌，比如?date=[timestamp]。在jQuery和YUI中，您可以告诉它们自动执行此操作。 使用POST而不是GET 发送一个HTTP响应头，明确禁止浏览器缓存它