Critical Resources and the First 14 KB (2022)
tunetheweb.com
Critical Resources and the First 14 KB (2022)
1–10 of 12 posts
Re: Critical Resources and the First 14 KB (2022)
#2Separately from the content, this page loaded instantly for me. Its remarkable how good / different the experience is compared to 99% of websites out there.
Re: Critical Resources and the First 14 KB (2022)
#3Separately from the content, this page loaded instantly for me. Its remarkable how good / different the experience is compared to 99% of websites out there.
It loads as fast as a raw basic html page, which is amazing
Re: Critical Resources and the First 14 KB (2022)
#4Separately from the content, this page loaded instantly for me. Its remarkable how good / different the experience is compared to 99% of websites out there.
Of course it did, it was less than 14 kB.
But in all seriousness, this sort of site is what I wish more sites were like. No ridiculous JS rendering engine, or 11 billion AJAX requests to 3rd party servers, just simple HTML and CSS.
Re: Critical Resources and the First 14 KB (2022)
#5Separately from the content, this page loaded instantly for me. Its remarkable how good / different the experience is compared to 99% of websites out there.
Of course it did, it was less than 14 kB. But in all seriousness, this sort of site is what I wish more sites were like. No ridiculous JS rendering engine, or 11 billion AJAX requests to 3rd party servers, just simple HTML and CSS.
There were a total of 183 requests, many of them going to things like disqus, facebook, webmention, google-analytics, google accounts, and others.
Re: Critical Resources and the First 14 KB (2022)
#6Somewhat related: when I have very flaky internet connection hacker news is one of the few websites that still work. I guess it has something to do with the response size?
Re: Critical Resources and the First 14 KB (2022)
#7Separately from the content, this page loaded instantly for me. Its remarkable how good / different the experience is compared to 99% of websites out there.
It took almost a second for me; I used devtools and it was about 200ms total for connection/TLS/download of the HTML (which is in fact under 14k (a bit over 35k uncompressed)). But then none of the assets (including the stylesheet) were queued for download until after 900ms. Does it really take 700ms to decompress and parse ~35k of HTML?
Re: Critical Resources and the First 14 KB (2022)
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of course it did, it was less than 14 kB. But in all seriousness, this sort of site is what I wish more sites were like. No ridiculous JS rendering engine, or 11 billion AJAX requests to 3rd party servers, just simple HTML and CSS.
There were a total of 183 requests, many of them going to things like disqus, facebook, webmention, google-analytics, google accounts, and others.
For me the page rendered before many of those things were downloaded.
Re: Critical Resources and the First 14 KB (2022)
#9Somewhat related: when I have very flaky internet connection hacker news is one of the few websites that still work. I guess it has something to do with the response size?
Sometimes it reloads so quickly I'm not sure if I hit ctrl-r or not
Re: Critical Resources and the First 14 KB (2022)
#10Separately from the content, this page loaded instantly for me. Its remarkable how good / different the experience is compared to 99% of websites out there.
It took almost a second for me; I used devtools and it was about 200ms total for connection/TLS/download of the HTML (which is in fact under 14k (a bit over 35k uncompressed)). But then none of the assets (including the stylesheet) were queued for download until after 900ms. Does it really take 700ms to decompress and parse ~35k of HTML?
Site owner here! Even if it did take that long, browsers are clever enough not to wait until all the HTML is fetched as HTML can be processed in a streaming fashion. You can see here that stylesheets https://www.webpagetest.org/customWaterfall.php?test=240913_... are requested from the first bunch of HTML.
A second is little disappointing, but in fairness my lowly, single CPU, single core server with only 1 GB of RAM (a t2.micro server on AWS) was struggling a little with the load that Hacker News sent to it yesterday (16,000 page views in a day compared to about a third of that number for the whole month before that!). Plus the images on this page are a particularly big (because they are quite detailed so can't compress them more without losing that detail). So it was probably a bit slower than usual. At the minute everything is served from that one server (no CDN either at the mo - I really should stick it behind Cloudflare). It was a little play thing for me to test stuff out with, that became an occasional blog too on the side.