Comments on: Optimizing your JS and CSS http://morgamic.com/2009/08/18/optimizing-your-js-and-css/ stuff and things, according to Mike Morgan Thu, 20 Jan 2011 06:10:08 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: morgamic http://morgamic.com/2009/08/18/optimizing-your-js-and-css/comment-page-1/#comment-221240 morgamic Fri, 21 Aug 2009 19:14:35 +0000 http://morgamic.com/?p=232#comment-221240 Cool, thanks Patrick. It did seem like quite a jump, forgot about SSL there. I agree, the site could use a general overhaul but that'd be a larger project as it'd be a global change. We're tracking that here: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=500849 Cool, thanks Patrick. It did seem like quite a jump, forgot about SSL there. I agree, the site could use a general overhaul but that’d be a larger project as it’d be a global change. We’re tracking that here:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=500849

]]> By: Patrick Meenan http://morgamic.com/2009/08/18/optimizing-your-js-and-css/comment-page-1/#comment-221239 Patrick Meenan Fri, 21 Aug 2009 19:05:56 +0000 http://morgamic.com/?p=232#comment-221239 FWIW, looks like your pre-production tests were testing https and didn't have persistent connections so there was a HUGE penalty for every request (4 round trips). Also, your production test was on IE8 and the pre-production tests were IE7 so you get even more benefit from the 6 parallel connections and non-blocking js. Looks like there is still a ton of separate css and js files that could be combined which would get you under 2 seconds for the start render. FWIW, looks like your pre-production tests were testing https and didn’t have persistent connections so there was a HUGE penalty for every request (4 round trips). Also, your production test was on IE8 and the pre-production tests were IE7 so you get even more benefit from the 6 parallel connections and non-blocking js.

Looks like there is still a ton of separate css and js files that could be combined which would get you under 2 seconds for the start render.

]]> By: morgamic http://morgamic.com/2009/08/18/optimizing-your-js-and-css/comment-page-1/#comment-221229 morgamic Wed, 19 Aug 2009 08:43:48 +0000 http://morgamic.com/?p=232#comment-221229 For YUI you load just what you need, so yeah, already do that. We already have bugs filed for jshydra on production servers, but for something a bit different - https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=509503 Re: time difference it's just variance, I think. It was done at different times of the day -- didn't expect that to change much. For YUI you load just what you need, so yeah, already do that.

We already have bugs filed for jshydra on production servers, but for something a bit different – https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=509503

Re: time difference it’s just variance, I think. It was done at different times of the day — didn’t expect that to change much.

]]> By: Gijs http://morgamic.com/2009/08/18/optimizing-your-js-and-css/comment-page-1/#comment-221228 Gijs Wed, 19 Aug 2009 08:30:26 +0000 http://morgamic.com/?p=232#comment-221228 Could you easily take out the bits of YUI/jQuery that you don't use? Perhaps using JS static analysis (there was a recent post on that! :-)) ? Furthermore, it looks like load time actually increased in the reload page case (2.679s vs. 2.533s) ? What's up with that? Could you easily take out the bits of YUI/jQuery that you don’t use? Perhaps using JS static analysis (there was a recent post on that! :-) ) ?

Furthermore, it looks like load time actually increased in the reload page case (2.679s vs. 2.533s) ? What’s up with that?

]]> By: Dave Dash http://morgamic.com/2009/08/18/optimizing-your-js-and-css/comment-page-1/#comment-221227 Dave Dash Wed, 19 Aug 2009 05:35:08 +0000 http://morgamic.com/?p=232#comment-221227 ... also, I do have build scripts that I use that do this for my django apps, but its easily adaptable to anything. … also, I do have build scripts that I use that do this for my django apps, but its easily adaptable to anything.

]]>