3 ms·

Hey HN! I wanted to share an experiment I ran that tests the performance of RSC vs traditional client-side React on one of our product websites (productonboardi

Hey HN! I wanted to share an experiment I ran that tests the performance of RSC vs traditional client-side React on one of our product websites (productonboarding.com). I know RSC is a bit of a controversial topic since server-side rendering used to be an ancient paradigm with the shift to modern JS frameworks. As such, I went into the experiment with a healthy dose of skepticism. To test this out, I conducted an experiment where I built an RSC version and a traditional client-side React version of the same website and measured performance. We were able to improve our bundle size and speed by 62% and 63%, respectively. You can find the whole writeup here. https://frigade.com/blog/bundle-size-reduction-with-rsc-and-frigade https://frigade.com/blog/bundle-size-reduction-with-rsc-and-... I actually enjoyed building with RSC more than I expected to, and it made for a better user experience since it rendered almost 3x faster than the client version. Would love to hear any feedback and thoughts on our experiment. Have you started to use React Server Components yet, or no? Have you seen similar results?

stiiv 3y ago
A site visit might consist of more than a single page load, and (hopefully) includes some interactions. For some sites, "client-side + HTTP data as needed" strategy will have a longer time to first render, but might be much quicker once you introduce interaction. It doesn't look like either of your tools measures overall performance for a site visit (as I characterize it), but maybe it doesn't matter in your case. What was your thinking in this regard?
afavour 3y ago
> I know RSC is a bit of a controversial topic since server-side rendering used to be an ancient paradigm with the shift to modern JS frameworks I need to go lie down
askonomm 3y ago
> ancient paradigm I'm assuming Gen Z? You are aware that your index.html of your React app is also server-side rendered, right? And you are aware that all the API's that your SPA talks to are also server-side rendered, right?
- eyelidlessness 3y ago
  It’s a frequent refrain on here, whenever some post talks about doing any server rendering in a JS context, that it was done before… even well before. It’s so frequent as to be cliche, and usually rather dismissive of any actual substance to the context of whatever’s in the post. As I read it, OP is just anticipating that reaction, acknowledging it upfront with a bit of levity.

stiiv 3y ago

A site visit might consist of more than a single page load, and (hopefully) includes some interactions. For some sites, "client-side + HTTP data as needed" strategy will have a longer time to first render, but might be much quicker once you introduce interaction. It doesn't look like either of your tools measures overall performance for a site visit (as I characterize it), but maybe it doesn't matter in your case. What was your thinking in this regard?

afavour 3y ago

> I know RSC is a bit of a controversial topic since server-side rendering used to be an ancient paradigm with the shift to modern JS frameworks I need to go lie down

askonomm 3y ago

> ancient paradigm I'm assuming Gen Z? You are aware that your index.html of your React app is also server-side rendered, right? And you are aware that all the API's that your SPA talks to are also server-side rendered, right?

eyelidlessness 3y ago
It’s a frequent refrain on here, whenever some post talks about doing any server rendering in a JS context, that it was done before… even well before. It’s so frequent as to be cliche, and usually rather dismissive of any actual substance to the context of whatever’s in the post. As I read it, OP is just anticipating that reaction, acknowledging it upfront with a bit of levity.