2 ms·
Yes, that's the reason that SPDY exists, but my point is that that's actually a rare implementation in the real world. As was said elsewhere in this thread, an
by thwarted 13y ago
Yes, that's the reason that SPDY exists, but my point is that that's actually a rare implementation in the real world. As was said elsewhere in this thread, and what I was saying, is that the most likely implementation is that one request goes to, say, www.example.com, which serves a single HTML file, and remaining requests for resources that that HTML references go to outsourced-cdn.example.com. So it's actually more important to have pipelining and SPDY support on outsourced-cdn.example.com than it is on www.example.com. That is, chances are you don't need to worry about it, that's why you pay outsourced-cdn to. There is less of a need for multiple simultaneous requests when you have good client-side caching of resources too. The usefulness of multiplexed requests is negated if you only serve one request.
The above has been the exact case at a number of companies I've worked at.
Sites and companies like Google or Facebook, that serve all their own traffic, it becomes more important for.