Re: [WebDNA] Is WebDNA slowing things up - please try these URL's
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 2013
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 110285
interpreted = N
texte = As we saw, this is the "first byte" delay that changes between static = and dynamic (dynamic also includes php, asp etc=85) If your page is a = "normal" one (more than 1K), then the first byte will become a very = small percentage of the total downloading experience. Let's say you test with a few bytes page, like your test: 0.1 sec = difference will represent 20% of the total downloading time. If you test = with a larger page, the 0.1s first byte delay will remain, representing = a negligible part of the total download time. WebDNA is fast, very fast, and must be tested in real conditions. - chris On Mar 26, 2013, at 21:30, Palle Bo Nielsen
= wrote: > Christophe, >=20 > It's all about the user experience and you hit the nail with this = statement... >=20 > "... starts to load earlier with static and later with dynamic and it = makes the WebDNA page subjectively slower..." >=20 > The early start makes the user experience much better regardless of = the the two finishing at the same time. The first impression is king - = which makes WebDNA Second Place in this measurement. >=20 > /Palle >=20 >=20 > On 26/03/2013, at 11.52, christophe.billiottet@webdna.us wrote: >=20 >> If you check the webpage tests links i added, you will see very = little difference. However when apache serves statics files at disk = speed, WebDNA servers dynamic pages at RAM speed. This means that once = the "First Byte" has been delivered, WebDNA is faster than apache = serving static files, depending only on the processing power requested = by your code. In your test, the page is completely loaded in about the = same time, but it starts to load earlier with static and later with = dynamic and it makes the WebDNA page subjectively slower. Test it with = objective tools, as i did: the difference is negligible. >>=20 >> - chris >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> On Mar 26, 2013, at 13:23, Palle Bo Nielsen = wrote: >>=20 >>> But Christphe, >>>=20 >>> There is not a difference of 0.05 seconds as you state. The = difference is more like 0.5 sec on the repeated view. >>>=20 >>> /Palle >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> On 26/03/2013, at 09.09, christophe.billiottet@webdna.us wrote: >>>=20 >>>> A is sent from apache to webdna which returns to apache after = interpretation. B is static and served from the disc, then cached. B = might be faster than A by 0.05 second. This is normal, dynamic webpages = will usually take slightly longer to deliver the "First Byte". >>>>=20 >>>> http://www.webpagetest.org/result/130326_RM_AZ1/ >>>> http://www.webpagetest.org/result/130326_QA_AYZ/ >>>>=20 >>>> - chris >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> On Mar 18, 2013, at 21:41, Palle Bo Nielsen = wrote: >>>>=20 >>>>> Looking for some feedback here... >>>>>=20 >>>>> Spec: Mac OS X 10.8.3 Mountain Lion Server. Using Server App and = WebDNA FastCGI 7.x (Latest). >>>>>=20 >>>>> I made two websites just to test what I think is too different = behavior. >>>>>=20 >>>>> Please try the following websites: >>>>>=20 >>>>> (A) http://1.qt.dk/ >>>>>=20 >>>>> (B) http://2.qt.dk/ >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> (A) has included in the code where as (B) = does not. >>>>>=20 >>>>> (A) is getting interpreted by WebDNA as expected (B) is not as = expected. >>>>>=20 >>>>> (A) has .dna whereas (B) has .html. If (B) got .dna then it would = be just a responsive as (A), which is not prefered. >>>>>=20 >>>>> So, why is (A) so much slower then (B)?? It seems like (when = looking at the progress bar in the browser, that it needs to think (or = wait) for something in scenario (A). >>>>>=20 >>>>> Any thoughts? >>>>>=20 >>>>> /Palle--------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to >>>>> the mailing list . >>>>> To unsubscribe, E-mail to: >>>>> archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us >>>>> Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us >>>>=20 >>>> --------------------------------------------------------- >>>> This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to >>>> the mailing list . >>>> To unsubscribe, E-mail to: >>>> archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us >>>> Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us >>>=20 >>> --------------------------------------------------------- >>> This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to >>> the mailing list . >>> To unsubscribe, E-mail to: >>> archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us >>> Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us >>=20 >> --------------------------------------------------------- >> This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to >> the mailing list . >> To unsubscribe, E-mail to: >> archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us >> Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us >=20 > --------------------------------------------------------- > This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to > the mailing list . > To unsubscribe, E-mail to: > archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us > Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us
Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:
As we saw, this is the "first byte" delay that changes between static = and dynamic (dynamic also includes php, asp etc=85) If your page is a = "normal" one (more than 1K), then the first byte will become a very = small percentage of the total downloading experience. Let's say you test with a few bytes page, like your test: 0.1 sec = difference will represent 20% of the total downloading time. If you test = with a larger page, the 0.1s first byte delay will remain, representing = a negligible part of the total download time. WebDNA is fast, very fast, and must be tested in real conditions. - chris On Mar 26, 2013, at 21:30, Palle Bo Nielsen = wrote: > Christophe, >=20 > It's all about the user experience and you hit the nail with this = statement... >=20 > "... starts to load earlier with static and later with dynamic and it = makes the WebDNA page subjectively slower..." >=20 > The early start makes the user experience much better regardless of = the the two finishing at the same time. The first impression is king - = which makes WebDNA Second Place in this measurement. >=20 > /Palle >=20 >=20 > On 26/03/2013, at 11.52, christophe.billiottet@webdna.us wrote: >=20 >> If you check the webpage tests links i added, you will see very = little difference. However when apache serves statics files at disk = speed, WebDNA servers dynamic pages at RAM speed. This means that once = the "First Byte" has been delivered, WebDNA is faster than apache = serving static files, depending only on the processing power requested = by your code. In your test, the page is completely loaded in about the = same time, but it starts to load earlier with static and later with = dynamic and it makes the WebDNA page subjectively slower. Test it with = objective tools, as i did: the difference is negligible. >>=20 >> - chris >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> On Mar 26, 2013, at 13:23, Palle Bo Nielsen = wrote: >>=20 >>> But Christphe, >>>=20 >>> There is not a difference of 0.05 seconds as you state. The = difference is more like 0.5 sec on the repeated view. >>>=20 >>> /Palle >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> On 26/03/2013, at 09.09, christophe.billiottet@webdna.us wrote: >>>=20 >>>> A is sent from apache to webdna which returns to apache after = interpretation. B is static and served from the disc, then cached. B = might be faster than A by 0.05 second. This is normal, dynamic webpages = will usually take slightly longer to deliver the "First Byte". >>>>=20 >>>> http://www.webpagetest.org/result/130326_RM_AZ1/ >>>> http://www.webpagetest.org/result/130326_QA_AYZ/ >>>>=20 >>>> - chris >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> On Mar 18, 2013, at 21:41, Palle Bo Nielsen = wrote: >>>>=20 >>>>> Looking for some feedback here... >>>>>=20 >>>>> Spec: Mac OS X 10.8.3 Mountain Lion Server. Using Server App and = WebDNA FastCGI 7.x (Latest). >>>>>=20 >>>>> I made two websites just to test what I think is too different = behavior. >>>>>=20 >>>>> Please try the following websites: >>>>>=20 >>>>> (A) http://1.qt.dk/ >>>>>=20 >>>>> (B) http://2.qt.dk/ >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> (A) has included in the code where as (B) = does not. >>>>>=20 >>>>> (A) is getting interpreted by WebDNA as expected (B) is not as = expected. >>>>>=20 >>>>> (A) has .dna whereas (B) has .html. If (B) got .dna then it would = be just a responsive as (A), which is not prefered. >>>>>=20 >>>>> So, why is (A) so much slower then (B)?? It seems like (when = looking at the progress bar in the browser, that it needs to think (or = wait) for something in scenario (A). >>>>>=20 >>>>> Any thoughts? >>>>>=20 >>>>> /Palle--------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to >>>>> the mailing list . >>>>> To unsubscribe, E-mail to: >>>>> archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us >>>>> Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us >>>>=20 >>>> --------------------------------------------------------- >>>> This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to >>>> the mailing list . >>>> To unsubscribe, E-mail to: >>>> archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us >>>> Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us >>>=20 >>> --------------------------------------------------------- >>> This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to >>> the mailing list . >>> To unsubscribe, E-mail to: >>> archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us >>> Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us >>=20 >> --------------------------------------------------------- >> This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to >> the mailing list . >> To unsubscribe, E-mail to: >> archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us >> Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us >=20 > --------------------------------------------------------- > This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to > the mailing list . > To unsubscribe, E-mail to: > archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us > Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us
christophe.billiottet@webdna.us
DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!
Top Articles:
Talk List
The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...
Related Readings:
WebCat2b12plugin - [search] is broken ... not! (1997)
[AppendFile] problem (WebCat2b13 Mac .acgi) (1997)
search not executing from a post, but works fine with (2004)
date display (1999)
WebCat 2.1beta etc (1997)
WebCatalog on Solaris? (2000)
RE: Displaying Location (1997)
RE: (1997)
OT-JS question (2001)
Not really WebCat (1997)
[WebDNA] WebDNA 7.1 (2012)
process out of control....... (2002)
Almost a there but..bye bye NetCloak (1997)
Examples of cross-selling with WebCatalog? (1998)
WebCat2 several catalogs? (1997)
Separate SSL Server (1997)
emailer settings and control questions (1997)
WC 2.0 frames feature (1997)
Stopping bad HTML propagation ? (1997)
RE: [setcookie] & [redirect] (1998)