5 ms·
That's fast hydration. How much will the performance suffer if no hydration was done but you kept the multi page aspect? ex: As if you took out SSR from Thermas
by ithrow 6y ago
That's fast hydration. How much will the performance suffer if no hydration was done but you kept the multi page aspect? ex: As if you took out SSR from Thermasoft and did client rendering witg domvm but doing page reloads for main pages as it does now.
I ask because my server app is not a nodejs process and don't want to add one for now but do want to avoid heavy state management and client side routing as you did.
- leeoniya 6y agodomvm is pretty fast: https://krausest.github.io/js-framework-benchmark/current.html https://krausest.github.io/js-framework-benchmark/current.ht... but re-hydration is much faster than actually building the dom from scratch in js. instead of 20ms, it might be 60ms + some extra for render/layout time. however, unless you have very DOM-heavy pages, the perf should still be great from a user's perspective. you may get some flashing between page navigation since when you build the DOM in JS with domvm it's not streamed, but when the browser is parsing server-sent html, it is. the only way to know is to try it for your specific case. if you need SEO, it's probably sub-optimal and may take longer to for Google & Bing to index, from everything i've read.
- ithrow 6y agoNo SEO needed, web app behind a login. Will try to write a PoC with domvm, thanks. My goal is <300ms including 60ms network latency.