4 ms·
Yeah but 400ms is unacceptable this days
by tonyhart7 1y ago
Yeah but 400ms is unacceptable this days
- kragen 1y agoThat's intended as an unreasonably high upper bound. On my cellphone, in Termux, python3 -m cgi takes 430–480ms. On my laptop it takes 90–150ms. On your server it probably takes less. I agree that tens of milliseconds of latency is significant to the user experience, but it's not always the single most important consideration. My ping time to news.ycombinator.com is 162–164ms because I'm in Argentina, and I do unfortunately regularly have the experience of web page loads taking 10 seconds or more because of client-side JS.
- cenamus 1y agoIf the whole site takes 5 seconds to fully hydrate and load its 20megs of JS I'll gladly take a server side rendered page that has finished loading in a second.
- IshKebab 1y agoI would rather take a server side rendered page that finishes loading in 100ms than 400ms.
- rvnx 1y agoNow using the solution of OP, the JS loaded website now takes 5.4sec instead of 5sec, a 10% slowdown that the users have to pay, and that will increase server costs.
- 0x000xca0xfe 1y agoAverage website loading time nowadays is measured in seconds rather than milliseconds...
- ksec 1y agoOn site like [1] Total Real Returns running on Crystal, response time could be sub 10ms but you are fundamentally limited by latency between you and server. Which could be 150ms if you visit to US server from Valeriepieris Circle, where 50% of population lives. [1] https://totalrealreturns.com https://totalrealreturns.com