3 ms·
Reading through the webpage, I was thinking that points 1, 2 and 4 really wasn't relevant. We're talking about bandwidth limitations being the key factor here
by arcade79 6y ago
Reading through the webpage, I was thinking that points 1, 2 and 4 really wasn't relevant. We're talking about bandwidth limitations being the key factor here - not the rest.
1. Page Loading Issues are irrelevant, unless it's because of large items served over limited bandwidth.
2. Static vs Dynamic webpages are irrelevant, if the pages themselves are small. Dynamic of course incurs some CPU on the server-side, but that is a machine not bandwidth issue.
3. Limiting the amount of data is obviously important.
4. Number of requests to the server is only relevant for the request-size, CPU and tcp-overhead (which can be alleviated via multiplexing).
5. Yes, do compress the pages.
6. Agree, website development kits often makes the pages much larger.
7. Certainly, but this shouldn't be necessary if you have good cache-headers.
One thing that was not mentioned, was ensuring that static items are cachable by the browser. This has a huge impact.
- DaniloDias 6y agoIt’s pretty bold to say #2 is irrelevant. I don’t have data to point to, but anecdotally I believe I have perceived the performance impact of node pages over static pages. Do you have data to support your claim? He’s clearly running in constrained hardware.
- ldoughty 6y ago7 is CDN, and is necessary in the case he described shortly before -- a "hot article". Presumably, a hot article will not get lots of repeat traffic from the same visitor (sure, someone might browse, but you're probably getting 90% one-time visitors). Cache headers do nothing here.. a CDN is the only viable solution... And frankly, using CloudFront for 3 years at work, I started putting my own websites behind a CDN because it costs pennies to do so. This does not mean I disagree with your other statements, I too found it a mix bag of somewhat obvious or slow-server specific (not just low-bandwidth)
- FemmeAndroid 6y ago> 2. Static vs Dynamic webpages are irrelevant, if the pages themselves are small. Dynamic of course incurs some CPU on the server-side, but that is a machine not bandwidth issue. Huh? Sure, it's not a bandwidth issue, but the article is about more than serving on low-bandwidth. It's about using limited hardware more generally. From the first two sentences: > The cheapest way to run a website is from the home Internet connection that you already have. It's essentially free if you host your website on a very low-power computer like a Raspberry Pi. I guess the headline refers to bandwidth, and there's some bandwidth-specific framing, but the article is discussing more than just low-bandwidth situations.