Slow website; what's your take on this?
|
05-03-2014, 08:00 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-04-2014 12:55 AM by JMTC.)
Post: #23
|
|||
|
|||
RE: Slow website; what's your take on this?
(04-27-2014 03:25 AM)Anton Chigurh Wrote: Even though it's just a savings of 3kb, I would still grab the third image shown here, rename it to match what's in the file system, and upload to overwrite.Thanks, done so. (04-27-2014 03:25 AM)Anton Chigurh Wrote: You're looking pretty darn good on the only test parameter I use, Dulles VA on fast cable connection, IE 10. Here's that result from just now.That's true, results from LA today are also good: test result. (04-29-2014 04:17 AM)pmeenan Wrote: Don't focus too much on the results from a single test - run a bunch of them and see if the slow DNS is common or if you just happened to catch an outlier. A single dropped packet can add 2 seconds to DNS for example. Generally CloudFlare is usually good about DNS performance but their DNS servers also get DOS attacked a lot (usually with no visible impact since they deal with it regularly) but if you catch a test right when a particularly large attack is going on you may also see some impact.Thanks, that's true. My webpagetest results seem to have improved from that location, so probably just a fluke (for example, Moscow here from today). * * * * * * * * (04-27-2014 03:25 AM)Anton Chigurh Wrote: You can also turn CF off and test your site - this can be educational in showing you CF really doesn't do, jack for you.As an update, I upgraded previous weekend to CloudFlare Pro, not only since this would get better performance but also for the security. So far I have the impression that my first byte times have dropped, perhaps due that paying customers get a priority in a data centre over free customers. Besides that, I also changed the following: * Changed cache expire headers from htaccess for HTML to multiple weeks so that more content is served from a CF data centre; * Enabled SPDY, * Enabled mirage 2 and image optimization from CF. This has dropped my grade due to how mirage works. If I look at Pingdom's RUM data, performance last week was much, much poorer: - Average page load time 3.9s (501 pageviews), - Average page load has increased for various countries compared to the weeks before: US (154 pageviews, now 4.0s), Australia (17 pageviews, now 35.0s!), UK (16 pageviews, now 3.9s). - Only a few countries with more than 10 pageviews have an average page load below 2 seconds this week: Hong Kong (0.78s), Germany (1.1s), Russia (0.93s), Italy (1.1s), Netherlands (0.40s), Ukraine (1.2s). I don't understand this: why would page views from Ukraine almost be four times as quick than from the US, given that the latter quite probably has superior internet infrastructure? Furthermore, if I look at the average page load times as collected by Pingdom RUM, performance has deteriorated recently (I did not change the site layout; graph shows data from the last month. ): Edit: Do you guys know how reliable Pingdom's RUM data is? I've tried to replicate the poor results from Australia, but I still get a load time less than 3 seconds (test result), which is nowhere near the poor results Pingdom suggest. |
|||
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)