Manchester so much to answer for
|
01-14-2016, 09:32 PM
Post: #1
|
|||
|
|||
Manchester so much to answer for
Morning,
I'm hoping someone can help me. I've been running a few tests and am getting some weird results. Can anyone explain the dramatic differences and rational behind long load times? https://www.standardlifeworkplace.co.uk/workplace From: Manchester, UK - Chrome - Cable - First view load time 15.267s https://www.standardlifeworkplace.co.uk From: Manchester, UK - Chrome - Cable - First view load time 56.871s Test ran with 'Ignore SSL Certificate Errors checked' https://www.standardlifeworkplace.co.uk/workplace From: Manchester, UK - Chrome - Cable - First view load time 4.884s https://www.standardlifeworkplace.co.uk From: Manchester, UK - Chrome - Cable - First view load time 4.699s Any help/thoughts appreciated, thanks |
|||
01-15-2016, 05:33 AM
Post: #2
|
|||
|
|||
RE: Manchester so much to answer for
I always test with the cable connection in Dulles VA because over the years I have found it to be the most consistent internet connection in WPT. I also only test with IE 11 for "worst case" scenario.
Here's a typical test on you, I ran 4 or 5 getting about the same results: http://www.webpagetest.org/result/160114_9N_11EX/ |
|||
01-15-2016, 08:25 PM
(This post was last modified: 01-15-2016 08:59 PM by trevor_mccombie.)
Post: #3
|
|||
|
|||
RE: Manchester so much to answer for
Thanks Anton,
Agree in principle re: your "worst case" scenario and IE11. Unfortunately running the test from Dulles VA still shows the site taking 13.886s on Chrome. So in this case Chrome is the "worst case"!! http://www.webpagetest.org/result/160115_7N_HQ8/ I should be clear I'm not saying that this is the fault of where I'm running the test from. I'm more leaning toward some issue with HTTPS but I'm not sure what. Thanks ::::: ::::: ::::: ::::: ::::: UPDATE.... So I got a little obsessive after my initial post above and decided to take a little world tour. It might help if I mention I'm based in Edinburgh, Scotland UK to put this into some sort of perspective. The following we're all ran on 5x, Chrome with a Cable connection. Remembering I'm based in the UK its surprising Ireland comes out worst. I should also make it clear that in reality on viewing the page load in Chrome it takes no where near these times to load. Ireland - EC2 61.331s Shanghai, China 48.645s Australia - EC2 46.141s Amsterdam, NL - Go Daddy 27.593s Moscow, Russia 21.163s Johannesburg, South Africa 16.785s Ashburn, VA USA - Yottaa 14.927s Dulles, VA 13.886s Frankfurt, DE 13.629s San Francisco, CA USA - Yottaa 12.174s Sydney, Australia (Servers Australia) 11.681s Brazil - EC2 9.2s Hong Kong, China 8.869s Petah-Tiqwa, Israel 6.938s Montreal, Canada - Akamai 4.969s New York, NY USA 3.531s Brussels, BE 3.517s Paris, FR 3.418s Prague, Czech Republic 3.104s |
|||
01-21-2016, 12:05 AM
Post: #4
|
|||
|
|||
RE: Manchester so much to answer for
Are you using EV SSL Certificates? The long gaps in Chrome are the certificate verification (which Chrome only does for EV certs).
They only show up in the waterfalls for Firefox right now: http://www.webpagetest.org/result/160120...659c98237/ Requests 1,2,4,19 and 30 are all certificate checks in this waterfall: http://www.webpagetest.org/result/160120...1/details/ Depending on the performance of the OCSP responder it can cause huge gaps like you see from time to time. You won't generally see those in your local testing since the certs were recently validated and it isn't checking them every time. |
|||
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
User(s) browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)