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

Getting Postmark’s Lighthouse Performance Score to 100

wildbit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–39 of 39 posts

Re: Getting Postmark’s Lighthouse Performance Score to 100

#31

Post by onion2k »

kaycebasques wrote: post #24
pupppet wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I've learned a ton for web perf stuff from the devtools and Lighthouse docs, so thanks for your work on those. :)

Re: Getting Postmark’s Lighthouse Performance Score to 100

#32

Post by pupppet »

kaycebasques wrote: post #24
pupppet wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The Opportunities and Diagnostics sections may not, but your Performance score is affected by loading additional external files.

Re: Getting Postmark’s Lighthouse Performance Score to 100

#33

Post by frenchy »

innocenat wrote: post #25

I 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…

The short of it is that lighthouse is a tool produced by Google to indicate the sort of things they might penalize you for in search results.

Its results might be arbitrary, but for some industries, when Google says "jump", you say "how high?".

Re: Getting Postmark’s Lighthouse Performance Score to 100

#34

Post by addedlovely »

kaycebasques wrote: post #27
innocenat wrote: post #25

I 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…

Thanks for your work, lighthouse is great!

Helps push general performance and best practise forward. And its communicated in a way non techie's understand.

Almost too easily - have had some 'consultants' run 'reports' that are just lighthouse re-badged, coupled with no technical understanding of what the action points mean, or why they may not be suitable for the platform / workflow in use.

But for the most part it's a positive tool, thanks!

Re: Getting Postmark’s Lighthouse Performance Score to 100

#37

Post by coldtea »

innocenat wrote: post #25

I 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…

>I don't get why 100 lighthouse is important -- maybe someone could clarify it for me.

It's not as important as your page rendering correctly, or finding the cure of cancer. It is however a nice goal to strive for regarding performance, encapsulated in an easy to use scoring tool.

Re: Getting Postmark’s Lighthouse Performance Score to 100

#38

Post by divbzero »

onion2k wrote: post #15

All you really need to do to get a 100 perf score is to cut out any unused elements, only load the CSS you need, load any JS you need as late as possible (defer the at least), and optimize your fonts and images. If you're using a decent host that has a point of presence fairly close to where Lighthouse is running then you should get a decent score. My own website has a 4x100 Lighthouse score. If you're interested in…

“Only load the CSS you need” is the piece I don’t have a go-to tool for. Coverage in Chrome DevTools provides a quick but manual way to identify above-the-fold CSS. Critical, criticalCSS, and Penthouse all look like good options for a build process. [1] [2]

[1]: https://web.dev/defer-non-critical-css/

[2]: https://web.dev/extract-critical-css/

Re: Getting Postmark’s Lighthouse Performance Score to 100

#39

Post by pbowyer »

XCSme wrote: post #36

Does a blank page also get 100 perf score? In that case, 100 perf score doesn't mean best user experience.

Spot on. I've no doubt that many sites will measure the trade-offs to reach 100 and find it reduces the metrics they care about.

A quick examination of the sites on https://www.11ty.dev/speedlify/ suggest there's a distinct look/set of trade-offs made to get this score.

Post reply on HN