41–50 of 292 posts
Is this image inlining thing something new? Am I reading it correctly that the images are encoded in base64 and delivered as html? Surely this is a bad idea... no?
http://davidbcalhoun.com/2011/when-to-base64-encode-images-a...
How much does HTTP/2 mitigate the need for such techniques, if at all?
But the other points remain: No Javascript is still the fastest Javascript framework, and while you can do lots of crazy hacks with CSS, maybe you shouldn't.
Is this image inlining thing something new? Am I reading it correctly that the images are encoded in base64 and delivered as html? Surely this is a bad idea... no?
> Is this image inlining thing something new? No, it's been around since forever. Just not used terribly often. > Am I reading it correctly that the images are encoded in base64 and delivered as html? Surely this is a bad idea... no? It depends. Making a new request to fetch the image always has overhead. Whether that overhead is bigger or smaller than the overhead of base64-encoding the image depends on: • file size…
Pretty good at 97/100 on Google's PageSpeed Insights - https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights/?url=...
Is this image inlining thing something new? Am I reading it correctly that the images are encoded in base64 and delivered as html? Surely this is a bad idea... no?
> Is this image inlining thing something new? No, it's been around since forever. Just not used terribly often. > Am I reading it correctly that the images are encoded in base64 and delivered as html? Surely this is a bad idea... no? It depends. Making a new request to fetch the image always has overhead. Whether that overhead is bigger or smaller than the overhead of base64-encoding the image depends on: • file size…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You could just throw it on S3. Even better, you could put it behind a CDN like Cloudfront and the total cost would be a dollar or two a month, not $25+ and it would be significantly faster. I apologize for quibbling (really, I do! but I'm an infrastructure guy! This is my bag!). Yes, host it on S3, but ALWAYS put a CDN in front of S3 with long cache times (even just Cloudfront works). S3 can sporadically take hundr…
How long S3 takes to fulfil a request does not affect bandwidth. I personally went the other way. I still use CloudFront as a CDN but made it cache items for short periods of time. Invalidation was too much of a hassle, and it took too long. Admittedly, I should use hashes or something of the sort to keep my items versioned, but laziness always gets in the way.
Correct. Did I insinuate that? I apologize if I did. They are two distinct issues, both of which a CDN prevents.
1. S3 outbound bandwidth is expensive. Use it only as an object store of last resort. Your CDN bandwidth is orders of magnitude cheaper (don't believe me, go compare the pricing).
2. S3 response times can vary wildly at times. Use a CDN to avoid this.
And of course feel free to use a cache key instead of invalidating via an API if ~15 minutes it too long to wait for fresh content to appear at edges.
PS Don't apologize for laziness. When directed appropriately, its a most productive force.
Not that wickedly fast unless you're really near Dallas where the server is: https://performance.sucuri.net/domain/varvy.com Hosting on a single VPS is never gonna be very fast globally no matter what you pay your hosting. In fact our free plan on netlify would make this a whole lot faster...
Is this image inlining thing something new? Am I reading it correctly that the images are encoded in base64 and delivered as html? Surely this is a bad idea... no?
If it's small, the overhead from base64'ing it (if the page is gzipped) is lower than the overhead of opening a new HTTP connection just to retrieve that one image.
Not that wickedly fast unless you're really near Dallas where the server is: https://performance.sucuri.net/domain/varvy.com Hosting on a single VPS is never gonna be very fast globally no matter what you pay your hosting. In fact our free plan on netlify would make this a whole lot faster...