3 ms·

> I would bet that a site is faster by taking as many third-party or other domain assets and putting them back on the same domain and same server. There are ot

> I would bet that a site is faster by taking as many third-party or other domain assets and putting them back on the same domain and same server. There are other advantages to using a CDN beyond 'optimizing' browser cache usage: getting assets closer to your users reduces latency (and therefore increases throughput), which can be a noticeable benefit if you're hosting in San Francisco and serving Oceania/SE Asia. HTTP/2 won't change that: it will just mean distributing assets over multiple domains (to circumvent browser pipelining limits) will make less sense, but putting one asset domain behind a CDN will still be beneficial.

buro9 11y ago
Ah, I should clarify... if you already have your whole site on a CDN, and that CDN supports HTTP/2, then you are probably best not sending request to lots of other domains if you are able to serve the request from your own domain. The connection overhead of DNS + connection + TLS is still significant... and HTTP/2 means you'll already have a connection to your server, and the assets could already be being pushed to you, but at the least you'll be able to grab them from the same open connection.