Hi all,
There are two things that I think are pretty weird. First off, the Start Render, using SPDY, seems to happen very late. Is that really the case or is there a bug somewhere ?
Does Chrome really wait for every ressource to be loaded before it starts to render the page in SPDY mode ?
Then there’s that advice : “Use a CDN for all static assets”. Well ok, over normal HTTP it’s a quite good advice but over HTTPS/SPDY it doesn’t seem to be a good advice. Because there would be a secondary DNS resolution, SSL negotiation, and SPDY is there to mitigate the downsides of HTTP and this advice doesn’t apply to SPDY, right ?
What do you think ?
Well, to start with I don’t think “Use a CDN for all static assets” is very good advice anyway. If you leverage browser caching of static assets via .htaccess you don’t need a CDN for that. CDNs don’t and can’t help on very first visit, and browser caching is what cuts it on subsequent visits.
yeah but there are a few things that can make the use of a CDN interesting : cookies sizes (not important with SPDY), simultaneous connections allowed on a same domain (same) and so on.
I kinda agree with what you wrote, but sometimes a CDN helps.
It also helps if you’re using a static IP as CDN for not search engine friendly ressources : no DNS resolving, “free” connections (not counted in the 6-max pool of connections to a domain)… I spent weeks and weeks to optimize pages loadings and it’s not a bad advice but, it’s not THAT important. Caching is, you’re right. Except if your first page loading is really slow.
BTW I love No Country For Old Men 
[quote=“sunjohn, post:3, topic:8687”]
yeah but there are a few things that can make the use of a CDN interesting : cookies sizes (not important with SPDY), simultaneous connections allowed on a same domain (same) and so on.
I kinda agree with what you wrote, but sometimes a CDN helps.
It also helps if you’re using a static IP as CDN for not search engine friendly ressources : no DNS resolving, “free” connections (not counted in the 6-max pool of connections to a domain)… I spent weeks and weeks to optimize pages loadings and it’s not a bad advice but, it’s not THAT important. Caching is, you’re right. Except if your first page loading is really slow.[/quote]You’re making the case against the CDNs - because the more you have your pages optimized the less and less you need one. See?
[quote]BTW I love No Country For Old Man
[/quote]Great novel, great movie. Could it be that I could be the cowboy in that mystery who died so long ago in that El Paso sand?
Oh… yeah, absolutely ! From the very start I was thinking about cookieless domains instead of CDNs.
That’s probably because before switching to HTTPS, my domain for static ressources had “cdn” in its name.
I’m pretty sure CDNs are useful for large websites with a worldwide audience (latency, load balancing…), but my website isn’t that successful, plus it’s written in french and France is a small country, so…