[deleted]
Getting Postmark’s Lighthouse Performance Score to 100
21–30 of 39 posts
Re: Getting Postmark’s Lighthouse Performance Score to 100
#22The problem with being a slave to these Lighthouse scores is the test is only concerned with the one page you are testing. If you assume your visitor will only visit a single page on your site that's fine, but even if they visit a second page, nearly everything it suggests you do will make that second page load slower than if you had developed the page using the traditional methods- external CSS/JS files that apply t…
The only reason the second page loads slower is because the user hasn't downloaded all the things they need to display it yet - in other words, you're suggesting downloading unused data on the first page in order to make the second page load faster. I'd argue that's not optimal because what you're gaining on the second page you're losing on the first page. Also you always have to remember that users won't necessarily…
Webpack 5's federated modules have the potential to be a game-changer for addressing precisely this. Exciting times at the leading edge of webperf optimization.
Re: Getting Postmark’s Lighthouse Performance Score to 100
#23The problem with being a slave to these Lighthouse scores is the test is only concerned with the one page you are testing. If you assume your visitor will only visit a single page on your site that's fine, but even if they visit a second page, nearly everything it suggests you do will make that second page load slower than if you had developed the page using the traditional methods- external CSS/JS files that apply t…
> the test is only concerned with the one page you are testing
A common practice is to use Lighthouse CI to test a set of representative pages across your site (such as your homepage, product search pages, and product detail pages if you're an e-commerce site). Every time that someone submits a pull request, Lighthouse CI runs Lighthouse against all of the representative pages to help you gain confidence that you have not introduced weird regressions on the rest of your site. https://web.dev/lighthouse-ci
> nearly everything it suggests you do will make that second page load slower
Which audits exactly are you referring to? To be frank, I highly doubt that claim.
Disclosure: I work on Lighthouse and web.dev
Re: Getting Postmark’s Lighthouse Performance Score to 100
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
The only reason the second page loads slower is because the user hasn't downloaded all the things they need to display it yet - in other words, you're suggesting downloading unused data on the first page in order to make the second page load faster. I'd argue that's not optimal because what you're gaining on the second page you're losing on the first page. Also you always have to remember that users won't necessarily…
Lighthouse doesn't care about HTTP2, it'll ding you for loading external files. Also you're not just gaining for the second page, you're gaining for all pages visited on the site going forward.
> it'll ding you for loading external files
The Opportunities and Diagnostics sections don't contribute to your Performance score. Your overall Performance score is a weighted average of the Performance metrics [1]. The Opportunities and Diagnostics sections are just potential ideas on changes that may help you. It's up to you to decide what's best for your site.
[1] https://web.dev/performance-scoring/
Disclosure: I work on Lighthouse and web.dev
Re: Getting Postmark’s Lighthouse Performance Score to 100
#25I don't get why 100 lighthouse is important -- maybe someone could clarify it for me.
My main pet peeve with lighthouse is the "Eliminate render-blocking resource". It suggest inlining critical CSS and defer the rest. However, in my experience with limited testing group, there are no perceivable different at all.
I also have way too many web site that origin summary and field data shows all green, but the lab data is almost always in either yellow or red.
Re: Getting Postmark’s Lighthouse Performance Score to 100
#26Informal survey: which Lighthouse opportunities/diagnostics/suggestions/metrics have been most helpful for you? Least helpful?
Suggestions/feedback on the Lighthouse guides is also welcome (the documentation that you see after clicking those "Learn more" links).
Disclosure: I work on Lighthouse and web.dev
Re: Getting Postmark’s Lighthouse Performance Score to 100
#27I don't get why 100 lighthouse is important -- maybe someone could clarify it for me. My main pet peeve with lighthouse is the "Eliminate render-blocking resource". It suggest inlining critical CSS and defer the rest. However, in my experience with limited testing group, there are no perceivable different at all. I also have way too many web site that origin summary and field data shows all green, but the lab data is…
Lighthouse is a lab tool [1] for testing the performance of web pages. It specifically helps you measure your Core Web Vitals [2].
There are many, many research and case studies [3] correlating improved website performance to improved business metrics (such as conversions).
Google Search has also signaled that the Core Web Vitals will become a ranking signal [4].
Disclosure: I work on Lighthouse and web.dev
[1] https://web.dev/how-to-measure-speed/#lab-data-vs-field-data
[2] https://web.dev/vitals/#core-web-vitals
[4] https://webmasters.googleblog.com/2020/05/evaluating-page-ex...
Re: Getting Postmark’s Lighthouse Performance Score to 100
#28Informal survey: which Lighthouse opportunities/diagnostics/suggestions/metrics have been most helpful for you? Least helpful? Suggestions/feedback on the Lighthouse guides is also welcome (the documentation that you see after clicking those "Learn more" links). Disclosure: I work on Lighthouse and web.dev
I apologise I'm going straight to Least helpful, because I've been trying to perfect scores* so these are fresh in my mind.
LCP. Oh boy, it's hard to track down what will make a difference. Is it the font, the CSS sizing of the element, the images in it... help on diagnosing what's causing the LCP time would be great.
But by far the least helpful metric is when I'm told that analytics.js could be optimised further. A (I assume) Google-sponsored tool is telling me I should improve the result from another Google tool. I appreciate why it happens, but it's frustrating :)
* Only to learn earlier this week from Paul Irish that some sites can't reach 100 due to the way the scoring curves are set.
Re: Getting Postmark’s Lighthouse Performance Score to 100
#29Informal survey: which Lighthouse opportunities/diagnostics/suggestions/metrics have been most helpful for you? Least helpful? Suggestions/feedback on the Lighthouse guides is also welcome (the documentation that you see after clicking those "Learn more" links). Disclosure: I work on Lighthouse and web.dev
I apologise I'm going straight to Least helpful, because I've been trying to perfect scores* so these are fresh in my mind. LCP. Oh boy, it's hard to track down what will make a difference. Is it the font, the CSS sizing of the element, the images in it... help on diagnosing what's causing the LCP time would be great. But by far the least helpful metric is when I'm told that analytics.js could be optimised further. A…
> I apologise I'm going straight to Least helpful
No problem, I should have led off with that because it's usually the most actionable feedback. Thanks for the feedback.
Re: Getting Postmark’s Lighthouse Performance Score to 100
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
I apologise I'm going straight to Least helpful, because I've been trying to perfect scores* so these are fresh in my mind. LCP. Oh boy, it's hard to track down what will make a difference. Is it the font, the CSS sizing of the element, the images in it... help on diagnosing what's causing the LCP time would be great. But by far the least helpful metric is when I'm told that analytics.js could be optimised further. A…
> I apologise I'm going straight to Least helpful No problem, I should have led off with that because it's usually the most actionable feedback. Thanks for the feedback.
I think the other thing is I find it hard to remember what the core web vitals mean, and to relate them to what's going on.
When we used to measure TTFB, DomContentLoaded and page fully loaded, I understood what those meant and could relate them to what's going on on-screen.
The core web vitals are a bit abstract to reason about - and how they're linked. FCP vs LCP, how they interplay...
I'd like a video where a page loads and PING! a vital happens, the page pauses and someone talks about that vital, what's led up to it, what's affected it and what would change it. Then the page unpauses until the next vital is reached. Something to make it relatable.