3 ms·
That’s highly dependent on the type of product / customers you have. If you’re running an online shop selling ice cream, going from 100ms to 2ms list sorting sp
by dagorenouf 4y ago
That’s highly dependent on the type of product / customers you have. If you’re running an online shop selling ice cream, going from 100ms to 2ms list sorting speed isn’t gonna get you more sales. I’d argue most online products are ice cream shops to some degree.
- vinay427 4y agoThe data seems to indicate otherwise: https://www.gigaspaces.com/blog/amazon-found-every-100ms-of-latency-cost-them-1-in-sales https://www.gigaspaces.com/blog/amazon-found-every-100ms-of-... > A 2017 Akamai study shows that every 100-millisecond delay in website load time can hurt conversion rates by 7% > 10 years ago, Amazon found that every 100ms of latency cost them 1% in sales
- undefinedzero 4y agoWith SSG and to a lesser extend SSR, React has close to zero impact on the initial page load. It’s all just HTML.
- taeric 4y agoWould be fun to see that revisited. Also misleading to imply a linear relationship. There will be a marginal cost, but no reason to assume constant.
- jokethrowaway 4y agoThat study doesn't prove anything. You're not amazon That said, having a performant website is nice, both for developer experience and for users. I have to say I pick solid because it's so damn fast (okok, and because it has an API which is React-like but without the crap doesn't make sense or an extra custom runtime just because)
- gorm 4y agoTry to do an a/b test and see the results for yourself. Also remember that those 100ms can in some scenarios turn into 300ms if you are not running on state of the art hardware, like most developers does.
- 0xblinq 4y agoThat’s just your gut feeling, not what actual data shows.