Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Making a Website Under 1kB

tdarb.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 109 posts

Re: Making a Website Under 1kB

#91

Post by toast0 »

diocles wrote: post #87
sjsdaiuasgdia wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Think you got your math off there. MTU of 1500 bytes = 1.5kB, not 15kB.

I believe the parent comment was thinking of 1 round trip time. Typically the TCP initial congestion window size is set to 10 packets (RFC 6928), hence ten packets can be sent by the server before waiting for an ACK from the client. So under 15kB or so (minus TLS certs and the like) website loading has the minimum latency possible given any other network factors.

TLS certs won't count against your initial congestion window, although there's still a bit of overhead.

If there's a session/ticket resumption, the server won't send a certificate, but it does still need to send a negotiation finished message, and it may likely want to send new tickets (I'm not sure if you can delay that though). In TLS 1.3, the client may send the request as early data, if not the request will come as the beginning of the second round trip, so the congestion window will have opened more for the response.

If it's a full handshake, the certificate is part of the first round trip, and the content is in the second round trip; the cert won't count against the congestion window, because it must have been received before the client sent the http request.

Re: Making a Website Under 1kB

#92

Post by Karrot_Kream »

diocles wrote: post #87
sjsdaiuasgdia wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Think you got your math off there. MTU of 1500 bytes = 1.5kB, not 15kB.

I believe the parent comment was thinking of 1 round trip time. Typically the TCP initial congestion window size is set to 10 packets (RFC 6928), hence ten packets can be sent by the server before waiting for an ACK from the client. So under 15kB or so (minus TLS certs and the like) website loading has the minimum latency possible given any other network factors.

Even if the initial congestion window is set to 10 segments, all that does is send out the packets if they're available to send. It still takes less time for the receiver to receive 3 segments than 10 segments, having the congestion window be that wide just means that the sender doesn't need to wait to receive ACKs for those 10 segments (which, to be fair, is faster than sending each packet and waiting for an ACK.)

Re: Making a Website Under 1kB

#93

Post by mtlynch »

PuffinBlue wrote: post #62
ehPReth wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SSL/TLS/https (the padlock symbol) prevents this. This site will never use those technologies. yet it has https? strange haha

The site is hosted in Fastmail - I think they must have enabled https or perhaps I missed that it was active when I put the site in there.

Huh! I didn't think Fastmail hosted webpages, so I thought this was an autocorrect mistake, but I see that they do indeed offer static hosting:

https://www.fastmail.help/hc/en-us/articles/1500000280141-Ho...

Re: Making a Website Under 1kB

#94

Post by bArray »

bArray wrote: post #54

Some comments here mentioned that these pages were essentially just text. I wanted to create something that would be useful, showcasing some basic HTML, CSS and JS. Here's an entry I hacked up together: https://coffeespace.org.uk/colour.htm It comes in at 1015 bytes and converts HTML colours into their shortened form (i.e. #00F for blue) and displays the colour visually.

Switched the directory to https://coffeespace.org.uk/tools/colour.htm

Also added https://coffeespace.org.uk/tools/avatar.htm for generating avatars in the same spirit.

Re: Making a Website Under 1kB

#95

Post by cosmodisk »

jrockway wrote: post #67
cosmodisk wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From time to time I visit websites that my i7 16gb dell xps struggles to process. Bloody hell, 20 years ago that kind of power would have powered a small super computer and now it can't run a news websites.

"i7" isn't a particularly useful measure of computer performance. It can refer to over 12 years worth of processors, including the ultra-low power version of the first model, a 1.07GHz processor. That thing probably has trouble loading Emacs.

It's a 3 year old laptop that can cope with pretty much anything I throw at it.

Re: Making a Website Under 1kB

#96

Post by pjmlp »

netr0ute wrote: post #81
jrockway wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"i7" isn't a particularly useful measure of computer performance. It can refer to over 12 years worth of processors, including the ultra-low power version of the first model, a 1.07GHz processor. That thing probably has trouble loading Emacs.

> That thing probably has trouble loading Emacs. I don't know about that, because my RISC-V SBC with a 1-core in-order 1GHz CPU and no GPU can load Emacs GUI just fine.

As long as it has more than 8MB, Emacs will do just fine.

Re: Making a Website Under 1kB

#97

Post by stevenhuang »

ollybee wrote: post #23

One of the linked examples zenofpython.org reliably crashes chrome on my phone, although not when rehosting same content on my own server. Can anyone reproduce that?

Funny, it crashed for me too on selection. Thanks Pixel 6 prefetch.

Tried again and it works on Firefox.

Re: Making a Website Under 1kB

#98

Post by jrockway »

pjmlp wrote: post #96
netr0ute wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That thing probably has trouble loading Emacs. I don't know about that, because my RISC-V SBC with a 1-core in-order 1GHz CPU and no GPU can load Emacs GUI just fine.

As long as it has more than 8MB, Emacs will do just fine.

I thought it was 80MB and even then you're constantly swapping.

(I had 32MB of RAM on the computer I learned Emacs on and it was totally fine.)

Re: Making a Website Under 1kB

#99

Post by sincarne »

iLoveOncall wrote: post #44
numlock86 wrote: post #29

For nowadays standards I consider anything below 500kB and with less than 6 server requests already pretty minimal, yet those are still numbers that can achieve a lot of things and still look so "modern"/"normal" that you'd have to look into the dev console to really appreciate the effort that has been put into these. Whenever I see websites that use 5MB large PNGs for photos and have over 30 requests over a time spa…

> For nowadays standards I consider anything below 500kB and with less than 6 server requests already pretty minimal, yet those are still numbers that can achieve a lot of things and still look so "modern"/"normal" that you'd have to look into the dev console to really appreciate the effort that has been put into these 500kB honestly doesn't require much effort at all. My WordPress blog with a popular theme and a few…

You could replace it with something more vanilla. I used to maintain a list of common share URLs, but this project is more more useful: https://github.com/bradvin/social-share-urls

Re: Making a Website Under 1kB

#100

Post by snvzz »

netr0ute wrote: post #81
jrockway wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"i7" isn't a particularly useful measure of computer performance. It can refer to over 12 years worth of processors, including the ultra-low power version of the first model, a 1.07GHz processor. That thing probably has trouble loading Emacs.

> That thing probably has trouble loading Emacs. I don't know about that, because my RISC-V SBC with a 1-core in-order 1GHz CPU and no GPU can load Emacs GUI just fine.

So can my Amiga 500, even in unexpanded configuration.

But it's microEmacs. Still, it is of course GUI (like nearly everything on the Amiga), and it works fine.

It shipped in the AmigaOS 1.3 extras floppy. Probably also bundled in other versions.

Post reply on HN