7 ms·
https://www.troyhunt.com/i-wanna-go-fast-https-massive-speed-advantage/ https://www.troyhunt.com/i-wanna-go-fast-https-massive-speed... This is by the same aut
by erelde 10y ago
https://www.troyhunt.com/i-wanna-go-fast-https-massive-speed-advantage/ https://www.troyhunt.com/i-wanna-go-fast-https-massive-speed...
This is by the same author, and there are critics that could be made against it. In some cases it is faster it seems.
- Ono-Sendai 10y agoHTTPS is basically HTTP, on a different port (443 instead of 80), with TLS encryption on the socket connection. TLS encryption adds overhead, it doesn't reduce it. Therefore HTTPS is slower.
- erelde 10y agotldr: HTTP/2 with TLS allows for better speeds.
- endymi0n 10y agoI think what OP was trying to convey in very few words: HTTP2 is much faster than HTTP, offsetting 50-150% (depending on what you're measuring) of the costs of encryption, as it's basically TLS only. For HTTP1, this is obviously false.
- zzzcpan 10y agoIn the context of streaming videos TLS encryption overhead is basically the only overhead that matters.
- erelde 10y agoIn fact in the dev blog of Youtube they showed it wasn't true. Can't find the post right now.
- zzzcpan 10y agoYou are incorrect, TLS overhead is too big to say something like that. Also on large requests, that you have in streaming, overhead of HTTP/1.1 protocol itself becomes negligible.
- Matthias247 10y agoAs someone who is implementing HTTP/2 I would also say that HTTP/2 has no advantage for high-bandwidth requests, e.g. video streaming. I would rather guess that even the unencrypted HTTP/2 variant might be slower than HTTP/1.1 in this scenario, since you now can't directly write into a TCP stream but have to interleave it with multiplexing info and have two flow control mechanisms working on top of each other. HTTP/2 will be mainly a large win for short requests, where it can avoid the large overhead of creating additional TCP connections and make header exchange more efficient.
- nimish 10y agoYou'd be right, except HTTP is often tampered with, so in practice is slower.
- Ono-Sendai 10y agoThat's true. On the other hand sometimes HTTPS connections are blocked.
- wise-bounce 10y agoHTTP/2 is faster than 1.1 though. And IIRC HTTP/2 enforces HTTPS
- Spare_account 10y agoTroy's title could be argued to be misleading. The perfomance improvement he's discussing is actually HTTP/2 against HTTP. Typically browsers that support HTTP/2.0 require the use of TLS, so with a little mental gymnastics he's claiming that HTTPS is faster. Edit: Apologies, I agonised over the wording for so long that 4 other people answered before me.
- mort96 10y agoWhat kind of mental gymnastics are you talking about? HTTP/2 is faster than HTTP/1. In practice, HTTP/2 requires TLS. Therefore, in practice, to get higher performance, you can achieve better performance with HTTPS than with HTTP.
- Latty 10y agoSure, but that's like saying "my wheels are faster than those", but they are faster because they only come attached to a ferrari. It's technically true, but it's also not really talking about what makes it faster. It is possible to do HTTP/2 without TLS, which would probably be faster. Now, in the real world, HTTP/2 is going to mean TLS - which is good, so yes, HTTPS will be faster in that case.
- Spare_account 10y agoNone of what you've said is incorrect. HTTP/2 over TLS is faster than HTTP/1.1 over SSL/TLS. I referred to Troy's assertion that "HTTPS is faster than HTTP", which is at best an incomplete statement and to some people completely misleading.