Forum Moderators: phranque
Fear of slow downloads led me to copy it's completed, after includes performed, source code and create a text page to compare download times.
Suprisingly the thing was quicker doing the includes than as pure text. There were about 5 google javascript adsense things on each page.
Total bytes are about 18,000.
Could this mean the file is too small to worry about ssi processing time? It says the html is taking 2.52 seconds at 56K and the javascript only .66 seconds at 56k. Only 10% of my users are dialup.
On one download time resource:
The text file took 1110 miliseconds
The includes file took 933 miliseconds.
On another download time resource:
The 18888 bytes text file took
56K 4.56 seconds
ISDN 128K 1.95 seconds
T1 1.44Mbps 0.90 seconds
The 17994 includes file took
56K 4.39 seconds
ISDN 128K 1.95 seconds
T1 1.44Mbps 0.90 seconds
And I was worrying about the ssi taking too much time to download.
Do you think the above results are possible, a text file being slower than one running includes? Or am I misunderstanding something.
Would there still be a bandwith issue for me due to the ssi occuring with each pageview if the includes occur relative to just offering the scraped source html page for pageviews?
[edited by: 4thePegeh at 6:43 am (utc) on Mar. 12, 2007]
-Corey
What suprised me was that requesting the url that involved all these includes loaded quicker than requesting the url that involved the scrapped text result of all of the includes.
I was under the impression a purely text file would load much quicker than a file that used several includes to produce the same text file. The download timers I used indicated the contrary.
