4 ms·
How is this faster? More DNS requests, more TCP connections. At first this is purely slower.
by gsich 6y ago
How is this faster?
More DNS requests, more TCP connections. At first this is purely slower.
- hoppi 6y agoPretty sure in HTTP 1.1, there was a max amount of concurrent requests per server/proxy. So using different domains allowed more rq/s.
- diggan 6y agoBrowsers used to/still do max number of connections per domain. Adding more domains allows you to do more concurrent requests.
- kevin_thibedeau 6y agoWith HTTPS you have to handshake for the first connection on each domain.
- weird-eye-issue 6y agoYes and it still outweighed that especially if you were loading a lot of images or a stupid amount of different JS/CSS files
- kevingadd 6y agoMore connections = better parallelism = faster downloads The DNS is cached.
- sdflhasjd 6y agoIt spreads out the load on disks and outbound bandwidth.
- weird-eye-issue 6y agoYou are making the assumption that the domain pointed to different physical servers. To get the benefits of what everyone else is describing it does not matter what the domains actually are pointing to.
- fuzzy2 6y agoA separate domain name for static assets would not receive any cookies of the actual site. This means less data transferred and in theory a proxy closer to the user could more easily cache these requests, even for multiple clients.
- TomGullen 6y agoBefore HTTP2 this was common
- herf 6y agoUpstreams were very limited, and HTTP requests send cookie data in each GET. For instance, if you had a 128kbps DSL upstream and each request was 2KB (loaded up with cookies), you're already limited to 8 requests/second. A cookie-less domain for small resources helped this a lot.