5 ms·
I just tried their domains page it took 10.8MB of data and took 2s for the DOM to be ready. page actually took 17s to fully render with multiple shift changes.
by miyuru 6mo ago
I just tried their domains page it took 10.8MB of data and took 2s for the DOM to be ready.
page actually took 17s to fully render with multiple shift changes.
all to render a domain search bar similar to google home page.
https://railway.com/domains https://railway.com/domains
- anematode 6mo agoDear lord. It's actually laggy for me to scroll on that page.
- hazelnut 6mo agosame here and I'm using a beefy MacBook (Apple M4 Max, 64gb ram). something is wrong with the front end code. there are a lot of animations, so my hunch would be that something goes wrong there.
- petcat 6mo agoweb dev is a sewer All my projects are server rendered with jinja/minijinja, bootstrap, jQuery, and htmx when I need a little bit of SPA behavior on forms. No builds, just static <script src= tags. Very fast and easy. I'll never recommend anything else.
- giancarlostoro 6mo agoWith C#'s Blazor templating, you can ditch all JS logic, and use raw C# for all front-end logic, and have it all be transparently server rendered similar to how Phoenix has LiveView. I also have experimented with HTMX and Django, and that seems to be a nice combination. Everything is AJAX again.
- CharlieDigital 6mo agoI've a C# fanboy, but Blazor's DX just isn't very good compared to say Vite. There are many conditions under which the hot reload just straight up crashes out regularly.
- giancarlostoro 6mo agoHot reload definitely needs to grow.
- tracker1 6mo agoAnd all the latency of classic ASP.Net Webforms. Click a button and see the page change in the length of a short yawn. Or, switch to client side wasm and load a payload that makes the typical react dev jealous.
- nicksergeant 6mo agoI'm coming back to Django after a decade of experience with it post-0.96 and having moved to Next.js a few years ago. Going from 1,700 dependencies to 65 total with Django + Wagtail + HTMX.
- pjmlp 6mo agoWhen I am given the choice to pick a stack, it is classical Java and .NET Web frameworks, with minimal JavaScript. On hobby projects same script approach without any kind of build step.
- bastardoperator 6mo agoSounds more difficult then modern web frameworks. We've all done this for little projects, but anything with users or development teams, your method is DOA.
- gib444 6mo agoThe 3.57MB background PNG is hilarious [0] [0] https://railway.com/dots-oxipng.png https://railway.com/dots-oxipng.png
- rubyn00bie 6mo agoHa! I normally wouldn’t find it quite so hilarious, but it’s a stylistically pixelated image. There’s just too much irony packed in there to not chuckle.
- c-hendricks 6mo agoIt's more halftone (might not be the correct term), not pixelated There might be more irony in saying it's stylized pixels without realizing that the style of the image can't be replicated with blocks of the same size but I dunno, I'm not Alanis Morissette
- picardo 6mo agoThey could have saved themselves 3MB by converting it to AVIF.
- allthatineed 6mo agoI got it down to 1.03MB by just switching the png to palette encoding mode.
- dawnerd 6mo agoGot the same running through tinypng.
- moralestapia 6mo agoPerhaps if those geniuses at Railway were slightly more competent they wouldn't have created a 10-minute-to-build frontend app, disregarding the choice of underlying framework.
- toddmorey 6mo agoThere are some easy optimizations wins for this page but none of the top ones are framework related. Maybe with the faster build times they can easily optimize images and 3rd party dependencies. As someone else pointed out, nearly half that data is unoptimized images. For the curious, google's current homepage is a 200kb payload all in, or about 50 times smaller.
- mattmanser 6mo agoWho remembers sprite sheets? Does that give my age away? I did an optimization pass for a client once where I got rid of a ton of the sprites but didn't have the energy to redo it all, so it just had huge sections that were blank. Super snappy loading afterwards though.
- ricardobeat 6mo agoYes, good times! With http2/3 they don't really matter anymore though, you get similar benefits from request pipelining.
- chrisweekly 6mo agoSpriting is actually harmful for performance except in specific HTTP-1 scenarios.
- staticautomatic 6mo agoDoesn't McMaster Carr still use sprites? Is that like the one optimization they managed to get wrong?
- deleted 6mo ago[deleted]
- flomo 6mo agoLooks like it, but isn't this site famous for being a "classic" storefront? Some CMSs would auto-generate sprites. If you are showing most of them, it's still a positive, I'd assume. And, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
- twohaibei 6mo agoFWIW with pretty aggressive uBlock setup its "just" 7MB and 1.6s to load, so it might be just their love for analytics, tracking, measuring and lack of smart code splitting thats killing the performance.