4 ms·

> Using SPDY shows huge performance improvements in production. Using SPDY only shows improvement over HTTPS. Over HTTP you get a huge performance hit! The ma

by maratd 12y ago

> Using SPDY shows huge performance improvements in production. Using SPDY only shows improvement over HTTPS. Over HTTP you get a huge performance hit! The majority of data has no need for encryption. Some of it does. Where it does, SPDY certainly makes sense.

acdha 12y ago
Your statement is only possibly true for a single request. In any real world application, the ability to issue many requests without having to open a new connection each time and to receive results out of order is a massive win over HTTP, even before you consider things like server push allowing resources like stylesheets or scripts to be delivered immediately rather than waiting for the client to finish parsing an HTML document.
- threeseed 12y ago
  There are benchmarks that show that SPDY is slower than HTTP if sharding is used. The use of this common technique gets around the connection limit.
  - Dylan16807 12y ago
    And opening that many connections absolutely trashes TCP load balancing.
  - acdha 12y ago
    Sharding helps with only the connection limit at the expense of extra redundant DNS delays and poor scheduling of the total available network capacity. It cannot help with the need to request resources sequentially and has no equivalent to something like server push avoiding extra round-trips + client delays before even issuing requests for related resources.
AlyssaRowan 12y ago
>The majority of data has no need for encryption. Some of it does. No. Wrong. Absolutely, incontrovertibly wrong. Everything that doesn't absolutely need to be plaintext should be encrypted; everything that can be authenticated should be. Don't believe me? The IETF and IAB can't really be much stronger than this: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7258 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7258 https://www.iab.org/2014/11/14/iab-statement-on-internet-confidentiality/ https://www.iab.org/2014/11/14/iab-statement-on-internet-con...

by maratd 12y ago

acdha 12y ago

Your statement is only possibly true for a single request. In any real world application, the ability to issue many requests without having to open a new connection each time and to receive results out of order is a massive win over HTTP, even before you consider things like server push allowing resources like stylesheets or scripts to be delivered immediately rather than waiting for the client to finish parsing an HTML document.

threeseed 12y ago
There are benchmarks that show that SPDY is slower than HTTP if sharding is used. The use of this common technique gets around the connection limit.
- Dylan16807 12y ago
  And opening that many connections absolutely trashes TCP load balancing.
- acdha 12y ago
  Sharding helps with only the connection limit at the expense of extra redundant DNS delays and poor scheduling of the total available network capacity. It cannot help with the need to request resources sequentially and has no equivalent to something like server push avoiding extra round-trips + client delays before even issuing requests for related resources.

AlyssaRowan 12y ago

>The majority of data has no need for encryption. Some of it does. No. Wrong. Absolutely, incontrovertibly wrong. Everything that doesn't absolutely need to be plaintext should be encrypted; everything that can be authenticated should be. Don't believe me? The IETF and IAB can't really be much stronger than this: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7258 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7258 https://www.iab.org/2014/11/14/iab-statement-on-internet-confidentiality/ https://www.iab.org/2014/11/14/iab-statement-on-internet-con...