Current time: 12-14-2017, 11:18 PM Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Slow website; what's your take on this?
04-09-2014, 10:57 AM
Post: #11
RE: Slow website; what's your take on this?
To some extent, suggesting dumping a product that you've never used is not really the best! After all, 10% of the websites on the web do use it, so it must be possible to get decent performance out of it surely???

To the best of my understanding, the basic CF just delivers your site as a proxy server, so it's still accessing your site to get the html behind the scenes ( you can easily prove that by looking in your weblogs ). As such, it will be slower, not faster than the original, and as I suggested an oldschool CDN will deliver the static content as well if not better, and you get to understand what is working and where the bottlenecks are: something that CF hides completely from you.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
04-11-2014, 07:30 AM
Post: #12
RE: Slow website; what's your take on this?
Of course I never used it, heard enough stories and took a look at the code, and it never crossed my mind to deal with it.

"10% of the websites on the web do use it" You know as I do that the number of installation doesn't mean the software is good, this is not the only one open source CMS in the world, just one with good marketing.

I just offered you my opinion backed by some number, if you are not a programmer just continue to use whatever you want, no need to jump on me.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
04-12-2014, 09:55 PM (This post was last modified: 04-13-2014 02:44 AM by JMTC.)
Post: #13
RE: Slow website; what's your take on this?
(04-08-2014 04:49 AM)histerius Wrote:  Maybe you should dump Wordpress. I never used it, but your page is all text and there's no reason for 7.21s load time. Quick comparison: your site 19 request, size 281.3kB; our site 56 requests, size 632.3kB, yet our load time is 1.57s. I believe CDN for a page of just 281.3kB is really not needed. Just my two cents.
Perhaps that might be an option. Ghost seems quick if I should believe this article, but I don't know node.js so there's a lot I should learn and change then. Other PHP based CMS (like Joomla or Drupal) seem less attractive than WordPress to me, so I'd rather stay with WordPress and fix the speed issue with better caching, CDN or a different server.

(04-09-2014 10:57 AM)GreenGecko Wrote:  (...)
To the best of my understanding, the basic CF just delivers your site as a proxy server, so it's still accessing your site to get the html behind the scenes ( you can easily prove that by looking in your weblogs ). As such, it will be slower, not faster than the original, (...)
True, by default CF more or less acts as a proxy. However, I've defined page rules to cache everything (since I don't have dynamic content). In theory, the website is cached at CF's data centres from one week (for the HTML pages) to 6 months (images, css).

If I look at the server data statistics, the first CloudFlare IP with the highest traffic this month so far has only used 6,7mb, almost a half mb per day, so I suppose this edge caching works.

* * * *

The average page load was this week 2,4 seconds. This average was significantly brought down by my own pageviews (which won't be collected from now on).

The Pingdom loading states for the last week (averages, 1.147 page views) tell the following:

[Image: pingdomLoadingStates_avg_week_till12-4-2014.png]

I read their explanation of loading states here but I'm not knowledgeable enough to interpret these data (frontend and network seem high, but don't know if these are average or out of line).

What is your take on these loading states data?
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
04-19-2014, 04:30 AM
Post: #14
RE: Slow website; what's your take on this?
Have no idea what you did but the website is loading very fast now. Smile
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
04-19-2014, 05:51 PM
Post: #15
RE: Slow website; what's your take on this?
(04-19-2014 04:30 AM)histerius Wrote:  Have no idea what you did but the website is loading very fast now. Smile
I didn't do anything this week oddly enough. Smile

Performance from Moscow is reasonable good now ( http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140419_Z6_63P/ ), from Amsterdam good ( http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140419_82_63T/ ), though performance from Los Angeles relatively poor ( http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140419_4J_63Z/ ).

In terms of Pingdom RUM data, there were 740 pageviews last week with an average load time of 3.0 seconds. Oddly enough, the pageload from Germany (avg. 6.3 seconds) is worse than from India (avg. 5.7 seconds), while this latter country is, in terms of geographical distance, around 17 times further away from the webserver than Germany is.

I'll have to do some more digging. :]
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
04-19-2014, 10:29 PM
Post: #16
RE: Slow website; what's your take on this?
Maybe something is wrong with LA, today I was unable to do any test with our website with it, although it works and works nicely, from fast to superfast :-) . So, I wouldn't blame your website, there are obviously some bad network conditions.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
04-21-2014, 04:01 PM
Post: #17
RE: Slow website; what's your take on this?
I use Wordpress and it runs nice and fast. Have you taken Anton's advice and added the expiry to your .htaccess? I have comeacross a number of slow sites using cloud. I am not convinced that they are as reliable as people had hoped it would be.

David Trounce
www.malleeblue.com
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
04-24-2014, 03:09 AM
Post: #18
RE: Slow website; what's your take on this?
(04-21-2014 04:01 PM)davidtrounce Wrote:  I use Wordpress and it runs nice and fast. Have you taken Anton's advice and added the expiry to your .htaccess? I have comeacross a number of slow sites using cloud. I am not convinced that they are as reliable as people had hoped it would be.
Thanks for your comment. Yes, I've specified cache control in the .htaccess file as suggested.

But your comment did make me realise something; the one week cache for HTML might be too low. In an extreme case, an unlucky visitor from a geographical region from which very little traffic comes can be presented with all slow pages because none of the pages he/she requests are in the most nearby CF data centre.

Don't know if this can explain everything, but does probably play a role.

I've set HTML to expire in six weeks now (other resources @ 6 months).
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
04-24-2014, 07:18 AM
Post: #19
RE: Slow website; what's your take on this?
OK, so it will be interesting to monitor the effect of the 6 week cache, and if possible test the site from different locations using Pingdom.

David Trounce
www.malleeblue.com
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
04-27-2014, 01:24 AM (This post was last modified: 04-27-2014 01:36 AM by JMTC.)
Post: #20
RE: Slow website; what's your take on this?
(04-24-2014 07:18 AM)davidtrounce Wrote:  OK, so it will be interesting to monitor the effect of the 6 week cache, and if possible test the site from different locations using Pingdom.
Yup, but so far I don't see an improvement in the Pingdom data. But I'll probably need to collect more data.

* * * * *

I just did a webpage speed test, which showed a 1,112 ms DNS Lookup time: http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140426...2/details/

What might cause that - is that CloudFlare or my webhosting? If I search on-line I only come across resources that talk about reducing the number of DNS lookups, which I already did. I could not find much about reducing the first DNS lookup time.

Webspeed tests from other locations, such as Germany (http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140426...details/), show a DNS lookup of 96ms.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)