I am using fragment caching in most places with Stash to cache the data from ExpressionEngine on my current project, but there are a few instances where pages are totally static, such as the about page. There is nothing dynamic at all going on with it, and therefore nothing that needs to be escaped from caching.
It seems I could just as easily use either {exp:stash:static} as {exp:stash:cache}. I set up the template with {exp:stash:cache} and I now see it sitting the db as a fully cached flat file. If I were to use {exp:stash:static}, then it would do the same thing but write it as a file to the specified directory instead of the database, I guess.
So my question is, for instances like this when there is no content that needs to be escaped from the cache, is one method significantly more performant than the other? I'd assume using the static cache is more performant as then there is no call to the database, but I'd appreciate some views on this before choosing it as my preferred method. Thank you!