No CDN.  We do have an F5 in-front of the site but that's stayed the same.

Sorry, no other analytics that I can access.

Here's what I did.  Clean up the html, css, javascript.  Consolidate CSS and
.js.  Minify CSS and .js.  Made sure Gzip was working on all the machines in the
pool.  Nothing that would change caching or the number of dynamic files.

Thanks,

j



--- In exceptional-performance@yahoogroups.com, Jonathan Klein
<jonathan.n.klein@...> wrote:
>
> Thanks.  Back to Marcel's point about caching - is there a CDN involved at
> all here that could be caching HTML as well as static content?  Or any other
> HTML output caching mechanism like varnish or something similar?
>
> Marcel's other questions are also important - it would be nice if there was
> another analytics package that you could compare the awstats data with, and
> it would help if we knew what kind of changes you made.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Jonathan
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 1:43 PM, Locol Man <amiwebguy@...> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> > Didn't remove any ajax calls or iframes.
> >
> > Here is what AW Stats defines a page as.
> > Pages: The number of "pages" viewed by visitors. Pages are usually HTML,
> > PHP or ASP files, not images or other files requested as a result of loading
> > a "Page" (like js,css... files). Files listed in the NotPageList config
> > parameter (and match an entry of OnlyFiles config parameter if used) are not
> > counted as "Pages".
> >
> > No empty src attributes or anything like that that I knew of that would
> > double page counts either.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > j
> >
> >
> > --- In exceptional-performance@yahoogroups.com, Jonathan Klein
> > <jonathan.n.klein@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hmm, did you remove any Ajax calls as part of your optimization that were
> > > classified as pages? Or maybe get rid of some iframes? I'm not 100% sure
> > > what is classified as a page by awstats, but I would guess that it's
> > either
> > > a problem with the measurement or that some page views were being double
> > > counted previously because of a secondary request on the page.
> > >
> > > -Jonathan
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 12:03 PM, Locol Man <amiwebguy@> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I have a big customer that I did some optimization work on and
> > somethings
> > > > turned out just as I expected but one thing has me scratching my head.
> > > >
> > > > I'm looking at the awstats for this and have compared the before and
> > after
> > > > month where they have the roughly the same number of unique visitors
> > (1.5
> > > > Million).
> > > >
> > > > Before and After.
> > > > Number of visits: 2.5 Mil to 2.5 Mil.
> > > >
> > > > Pages: 35,857,528 to 22,321,408.
> > > >
> > > > Hits: 219,265,615 to 108,757,559.
> > > >
> > > > Bandwidth 2,979 GB to 2,169 GB.
> > > >
> > > > The before and after on the hits and bandwidth I see are good, roughly
> > a
> > > > 50% reduction in hits and 27% reduction in bandwidth.
> > > >
> > > > What I can't explain is the number of page requests have gone down by
> > about
> > > > 38%. In most the information I've read on Google, Yahoo, etc. they
> > expect
> > > > page requests to go up as people are more apt to request an additional
> > page.
> > > >
> > > > This is an ecommerce site so there are a limited number of pages to go
> > > > through to sell a product so it's not like they go through more pages
> > to buy
> > > > the product. Without giving too much away I can say sales have
> > increased
> > > > month over month since the optimization, so that's all positive. I just
> > > > can't explain the large reduction in number of page requests (even
> > though
> > > > sales have increased)?
> > > >
> > > > Thoughts?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

I don't have access to any other analytics.  The main things I did was to
optimize, consolidate, minify .js, .css and images. Not a lot that would change
the number of dynamic/static pages.

Thanks,

j

--- In exceptional-performance@yahoogroups.com, Marcel Duran <contact@...>
wrote:
>
> Besides awstats, does this site happen to use Google Analytics or any other
> analytics solution? If so, are they also returning similar numbers for
> pages?
> If this is not the case, can you share what were the performance changes you
> made so we could help you guess the numbers?
>
> Marcel
>
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 12:51 PM, Locol Man <amiwebguy@...> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Marcel,
> >
> > Thanks, but I know that rule and I don't think that's it. Never came across
> > it in my testing.
> >
> > All the pages are .aspx pages so no caching or expires headers set on them.
> > Good thoughts though.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > j
> >
> >
> > --- In exceptional-performance@yahoogroups.com, Marcel Duran <contact@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Was there any <IMG>, <LINK> or <IFRAME> with empty SRC or HREF before?
> > > This might have been the cause of double counting before optimization.
> > > YSlow has a rule for that:
> > > http://developer.yahoo.com/performance/rules.html#emptysrc
> > > Read more about it:
> > >
> >
http://www.nczonline.net/blog/2009/11/30/empty-image-src-can-destroy-your-site/
> > >
> > > Another reason might be any HTML (considered as page by awstats) been
> > cached
> > > (expires headers), make sure none of your documents (HTML pages) are been
> > > cached on client by mistake.
> > >
> > > Just my 2 cents.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > > Marcel
> > >
> > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 9:24 AM, Jonathan Klein
> > > <jonathan.n.klein@>wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > > Hmm, did you remove any Ajax calls as part of your optimization that
> > were
> > > > classified as pages? Or maybe get rid of some iframes? I'm not 100%
> > sure
> > > > what is classified as a page by awstats, but I would guess that it's
> > either
> > > > a problem with the measurement or that some page views were being
> > double
> > > > counted previously because of a secondary request on the page.
> > > >
> > > > -Jonathan
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 12:03 PM, Locol Man <amiwebguy@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I have a big customer that I did some optimization work on and
> > somethings
> > > > > turned out just as I expected but one thing has me scratching my
> > head.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm looking at the awstats for this and have compared the before and
> > > > after
> > > > > month where they have the roughly the same number of unique visitors
> > (1.5
> > > > > Million).
> > > > >
> > > > > Before and After.
> > > > > Number of visits: 2.5 Mil to 2.5 Mil.
> > > > >
> > > > > Pages: 35,857,528 to 22,321,408.
> > > > >
> > > > > Hits: 219,265,615 to 108,757,559.
> > > > >
> > > > > Bandwidth 2,979 GB to 2,169 GB.
> > > > >
> > > > > The before and after on the hits and bandwidth I see are good,
> > roughly a
> > > > > 50% reduction in hits and 27% reduction in bandwidth.
> > > > >
> > > > > What I can't explain is the number of page requests have gone down by
> > > > about
> > > > > 38%. In most the information I've read on Google, Yahoo, etc. they
> > expect
> > > > > page requests to go up as people are more apt to request an
> > additional
> > > > page.
> > > > >
> > > > > This is an ecommerce site so there are a limited number of pages to
> > go
> > > > > through to sell a product so it's not like they go through more pages
> > to
> > > > buy
> > > > > the product. Without giving too much away I can say sales have
> > increased
> > > > > month over month since the optimization, so that's all positive. I
> > just
> > > > > can't explain the large reduction in number of page requests (even
> > though
> > > > > sales have increased)?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > http://developer.yahoo.com/performance/
> > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Marcel Duran
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Marcel Duran
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

At this point I think you need some other monitoring so you can make sure
the numbers you are getting from awstats are reliable.  Could you add Google
Analytics if only briefly?  Or analyze HTTP logs manually?  Without more
data I think you are going to have a tough time finding an answer.

-Jonathan



On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 5:35 PM, Locol Man <amiwebguy@...> wrote:

>
>
> I don't have access to any other analytics. The main things I did was to
> optimize, consolidate, minify .js, .css and images. Not a lot that would
> change the number of dynamic/static pages.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> j
>
> --- In exceptional-performance@yahoogroups.com, Marcel Duran <contact@...>
> wrote:
> >
> > Besides awstats, does this site happen to use Google Analytics or any
> other
> > analytics solution? If so, are they also returning similar numbers for
> > pages?
> > If this is not the case, can you share what were the performance changes
> you
> > made so we could help you guess the numbers?
> >
> > Marcel
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 12:51 PM, Locol Man <amiwebguy@...> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Marcel,
> > >
> > > Thanks, but I know that rule and I don't think that's it. Never came
> across
> > > it in my testing.
> > >
> > > All the pages are .aspx pages so no caching or expires headers set on
> them.
> > > Good thoughts though.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > j
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In exceptional-performance@yahoogroups.com, Marcel Duran <contact@
> >
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Was there any <IMG>, <LINK> or <IFRAME> with empty SRC or HREF
> before?
> > > > This might have been the cause of double counting before
> optimization.
> > > > YSlow has a rule for that:
> > > > http://developer.yahoo.com/performance/rules.html#emptysrc
> > > > Read more about it:
> > > >
> > >
>
http://www.nczonline.net/blog/2009/11/30/empty-image-src-can-destroy-your-site/
> > > >
> > > > Another reason might be any HTML (considered as page by awstats) been
> > > cached
> > > > (expires headers), make sure none of your documents (HTML pages) are
> been
> > > > cached on client by mistake.
> > > >
> > > > Just my 2 cents.
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > >
> > > > Marcel
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 9:24 AM, Jonathan Klein
> > > > <jonathan.n.klein@>wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > > Hmm, did you remove any Ajax calls as part of your optimization
> that
> > > were
> > > > > classified as pages? Or maybe get rid of some iframes? I'm not 100%
> > > sure
> > > > > what is classified as a page by awstats, but I would guess that
> it's
> > > either
> > > > > a problem with the measurement or that some page views were being
> > > double
> > > > > counted previously because of a secondary request on the page.
> > > > >
> > > > > -Jonathan
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 12:03 PM, Locol Man <amiwebguy@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have a big customer that I did some optimization work on and
> > > somethings
> > > > > > turned out just as I expected but one thing has me scratching my
> > > head.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm looking at the awstats for this and have compared the before
> and
> > > > > after
> > > > > > month where they have the roughly the same number of unique
> visitors
> > > (1.5
> > > > > > Million).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Before and After.
> > > > > > Number of visits: 2.5 Mil to 2.5 Mil.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Pages: 35,857,528 to 22,321,408.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hits: 219,265,615 to 108,757,559.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Bandwidth 2,979 GB to 2,169 GB.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The before and after on the hits and bandwidth I see are good,
> > > roughly a
> > > > > > 50% reduction in hits and 27% reduction in bandwidth.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What I can't explain is the number of page requests have gone
> down by
> > > > > about
> > > > > > 38%. In most the information I've read on Google, Yahoo, etc.
> they
> > > expect
> > > > > > page requests to go up as people are more apt to request an
> > > additional
> > > > > page.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This is an ecommerce site so there are a limited number of pages
> to
> > > go
> > > > > > through to sell a product so it's not like they go through more
> pages
> > > to
> > > > > buy
> > > > > > the product. Without giving too much away I can say sales have
> > > increased
> > > > > > month over month since the optimization, so that's all positive.
> I
> > > just
> > > > > > can't explain the large reduction in number of page requests
> (even
> > > though
> > > > > > sales have increased)?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ------------------------------------
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > http://developer.yahoo.com/performance/
> > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Marcel Duran
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Marcel Duran
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi,

I wand to improve the speed of our website and i find the idea of smush.it just
great. But it never works never never never.

I already get a message error like the famous one : Failed to create temp_dir

Or a parse error.

It's impossible to upload a large number of files on the website more 20 at
once.

You can upload less files with google chrome than ie...

The flash plugin crash everytime.

Please Yahoo team, make your plugin just works. It's just our need.

Please Please Please Please.

Hi, i get this message on 4 brower (IE, FIREFOX, GOOGLE CHROME, OPERA)

Upload error: [IOErrorEvent type="ioError" bubbles=false cancelable=false
eventPhase=2 text="Error #2038"]

Hi Mika,


Thanks for your feedback.
I heard about this issue in the past but couldn't reproduce it, now that you
raised it again I'm still not able to reproduce it.
I'm on Mac using the latest FF, C, O and S with flash version 10.1 r102 for
all these browsers except Chrome with flash 10.3 r181.
Could you please confirm your browser and flash versions? For flash just run

navigator.plugins['Shockwave Flash'].description

on your console.

It seems and issue with YUI flash uploader but I need more info before
investigating.


Thanks,

Marcel

On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 9:17 AM, mika.bellina <mika.bellina@...>wrote:

>
>
> Hi, i get this message on 4 brower (IE, FIREFOX, GOOGLE CHROME, OPERA)
>
> Upload error: [IOErrorEvent type="ioError" bubbles=false cancelable=false
> eventPhase=2 text="Error #2038"]
>
>
>



--
Marcel Duran


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Everyone,

This is just a quick reminder that the second #WPOChat is TONIGHT at 6PM
Eastern time, and will be moderated by Pat Meenan!  Check out all of the
details here:

http://www.wpochat.org/uncategorized/announcing-the-second-wpochat-monday-may-23\
-2011/

Hope to see you all on Twitter in a few hours.

-Jonathan


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I was just thinking about this today.  Using Google AJAX Libraries API allows
you to leverage Google's CDN which is awesome.  But if you are loading library
then you probably have some custom JavaScript code or plugins in separate files.

So, if you use Google AJAX Libraries API and you combine, minify, and gzip your
own JavaScript scripts then you end up with 2 http requests, one for your script
and one for the library hosted on google.  So, I don't know about test and
results but I am guessing that even without any CDN solution, you are better of
to just add the library to your one script and only make 1 http request.

This has just been my way of thinking and reason why I never use the Google AJAX
Libraries API, am I overlooking something?

Same issue on my side (failed to create temp dir), really need the website to
optimize my images.


--- In exceptional-performance@yahoogroups.com, "mika.bellina"
<mika.bellina@...> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I wand to improve the speed of our website and i find the idea of smush.it
just great. But it never works never never never.
>
> I already get a message error like the famous one : Failed to create temp_dir
>
> Or a parse error.
>
> It's impossible to upload a large number of files on the website more 20 at
once.
>
> You can upload less files with google chrome than ie...
>
> The flash plugin crash everytime.
>
> Please Yahoo team, make your plugin just works. It's just our need.
>
> Please Please Please Please.
>

It depends on your audience. If all your users are close to your server this
might be true, however you should take into account when you change a single
line on your JS you end up invalidating users cache. This might hurt users
experience if you update quite often, unless you don't expect users to come
back to your page.
Using Google AJAX API hosted on Google's CDN might also be good, because it
might be already on users' cache from other visited website prior to yours.
It's always desirable to reduce the number of HTTP requests but depending on
your website architecture both JS might come in parallel within 2 requests.
Also notice that users far away from your server will probably take
advantage of getting Google AJAX API from a closer Google server (CDN)
pretty fast whilst your JS might take longer.
You should run some experiments for some sample of your users and the
numbers will tell you.

Just my 2 cents off the top of my head

Best,

Marcel

On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 12:07 PM, ikadziela <iwokadziela@...> wrote:

>
>
> I was just thinking about this today. Using Google AJAX Libraries API
> allows you to leverage Google's CDN which is awesome. But if you are loading
> library then you probably have some custom JavaScript code or plugins in
> separate files.
>
> So, if you use Google AJAX Libraries API and you combine, minify, and gzip
> your own JavaScript scripts then you end up with 2 http requests, one for
> your script and one for the library hosted on google. So, I don't know about
> test and results but I am guessing that even without any CDN solution, you
> are better of to just add the library to your one script and only make 1
> http request.
>
> This has just been my way of thinking and reason why I never use the Google
> AJAX Libraries API, am I overlooking something?
>
>
>



--
Marcel Duran


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I did some experiments with this (one file, served locally versus 2 files,
one served from the Google CDN) and, like you said, found that it's
basically a question of audience. If your audience is local (from my
perspective "local" meant the continental united states) then one file is
faster. Hits from places like Singapore or Australia were a lot faster using
the CDN.

Personally, I don't factor the cache lottery into this at all. It's tough
enough to get content you control into a user's  cache and have it be there
the next time they visit. Assuming some other site will have used the exact
same resource is a stretch. Even if everyone was using the Google CDN copy
of "jQuery" (and they're not- especially at the big sites where people spend
most of their time) it doesn't mean that everyone is requesting the exact
resource- e.g.
http://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.6.1/jquery.min.js

Look at your own cache. Whenever I test this I've only got one or two
examples out of the dozens of possible URLs. Right now I've just got
/1.5.1/jquery.min.js

This isn't really definitive, of course. I keep meaning to do deeper
research into both questions, especially the latter since I'd like to lay
out some odds of hitting the cache lottery out of the Google CDN; but actual
paying work keeps getting in the way. Half-baked research is all I've got
right now.

Rob Larsen

-----Original Message-----
From: exceptional-performance@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:exceptional-performance@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Marcel Duran
Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2011 2:21 AM
To: exceptional-performance@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [exceptional-performance] Using Google AJAX Libraries API

It depends on your audience. If all your users are close to your server this
might be true, however you should take into account when you change a single
line on your JS you end up invalidating users cache. This might hurt users
experience if you update quite often, unless you don't expect users to come
back to your page.
Using Google AJAX API hosted on Google's CDN might also be good, because it
might be already on users' cache from other visited website prior to yours.
It's always desirable to reduce the number of HTTP requests but depending on
your website architecture both JS might come in parallel within 2 requests.
Also notice that users far away from your server will probably take
advantage of getting Google AJAX API from a closer Google server (CDN)
pretty fast whilst your JS might take longer.
You should run some experiments for some sample of your users and the
numbers will tell you.

Just my 2 cents off the top of my head

Best,

Marcel

On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 12:07 PM, ikadziela <iwokadziela@...> wrote:

>
>
> I was just thinking about this today. Using Google AJAX Libraries API
> allows you to leverage Google's CDN which is awesome. But if you are
loading
> library then you probably have some custom JavaScript code or plugins in
> separate files.
>
> So, if you use Google AJAX Libraries API and you combine, minify, and gzip
> your own JavaScript scripts then you end up with 2 http requests, one for
> your script and one for the library hosted on google. So, I don't know
about
> test and results but I am guessing that even without any CDN solution, you
> are better of to just add the library to your one script and only make 1
> http request.
>
> This has just been my way of thinking and reason why I never use the
Google
> AJAX Libraries API, am I overlooking something?
>
>
>



--
Marcel Duran


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

--
http://developer.yahoo.com/performance/
Yahoo! Groups Links

Thanks for the responses, this makes a lot of sense.  I also think that cache
will not make a big difference in this case (low chance of users having the
exact cached script coming from another site) but the point about audience
location and how often you update/maintain your JavaScript code is great.

Thanks,
Iwo


--- In exceptional-performance@yahoogroups.com, "Rob Larsen" <Rob@...> wrote:
>
> I did some experiments with this (one file, served locally versus 2 files,
> one served from the Google CDN) and, like you said, found that it's
> basically a question of audience. If your audience is local (from my
> perspective "local" meant the continental united states) then one file is
> faster. Hits from places like Singapore or Australia were a lot faster using
> the CDN.
>
> Personally, I don't factor the cache lottery into this at all. It's tough
> enough to get content you control into a user's  cache and have it be there
> the next time they visit. Assuming some other site will have used the exact
> same resource is a stretch. Even if everyone was using the Google CDN copy
> of "jQuery" (and they're not- especially at the big sites where people spend
> most of their time) it doesn't mean that everyone is requesting the exact
> resource- e.g.
> http://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.6.1/jquery.min.js
>
> Look at your own cache. Whenever I test this I've only got one or two
> examples out of the dozens of possible URLs. Right now I've just got
> /1.5.1/jquery.min.js
>
> This isn't really definitive, of course. I keep meaning to do deeper
> research into both questions, especially the latter since I'd like to lay
> out some odds of hitting the cache lottery out of the Google CDN; but actual
> paying work keeps getting in the way. Half-baked research is all I've got
> right now.
>
> Rob Larsen
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: exceptional-performance@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:exceptional-performance@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Marcel Duran
> Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2011 2:21 AM
> To: exceptional-performance@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [exceptional-performance] Using Google AJAX Libraries API
>
> It depends on your audience. If all your users are close to your server this
> might be true, however you should take into account when you change a single
> line on your JS you end up invalidating users cache. This might hurt users
> experience if you update quite often, unless you don't expect users to come
> back to your page.
> Using Google AJAX API hosted on Google's CDN might also be good, because it
> might be already on users' cache from other visited website prior to yours.
> It's always desirable to reduce the number of HTTP requests but depending on
> your website architecture both JS might come in parallel within 2 requests.
> Also notice that users far away from your server will probably take
> advantage of getting Google AJAX API from a closer Google server (CDN)
> pretty fast whilst your JS might take longer.
> You should run some experiments for some sample of your users and the
> numbers will tell you.
>
> Just my 2 cents off the top of my head
>
> Best,
>
> Marcel
>
> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 12:07 PM, ikadziela <iwokadziela@...> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > I was just thinking about this today. Using Google AJAX Libraries API
> > allows you to leverage Google's CDN which is awesome. But if you are
> loading
> > library then you probably have some custom JavaScript code or plugins in
> > separate files.
> >
> > So, if you use Google AJAX Libraries API and you combine, minify, and gzip
> > your own JavaScript scripts then you end up with 2 http requests, one for
> > your script and one for the library hosted on google. So, I don't know
> about
> > test and results but I am guessing that even without any CDN solution, you
> > are better of to just add the library to your one script and only make 1
> > http request.
> >
> > This has just been my way of thinking and reason why I never use the
> Google
> > AJAX Libraries API, am I overlooking something?
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Marcel Duran
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> --
> http://developer.yahoo.com/performance/
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>

advpng http://advancemame.sourceforge.net/comp-readme.html
jpegoptim http://www.kokkonen.net/tjko/projects.html

This is just a reminder that the next WPOChat is coming up on June 27th at
3PM ET (note the new time), moderated by Aaron Peters.  Check out all of the
details and submit questions here:

http://www.wpochat.org/web-performance-optimization/next-wpochat-monday-6-27-new\
-time-3pm-et-moderated-by-aaron-peters/

Let me know if you have any questions - hope to see you all online!

-Jonathan


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi,

We're pleased to announce two major features that we recently pushed live onto
GTmetrix:

* Test Server Regions
* HAR Diff - visual diff for HAR files

Test Server Regions

In addition to our main test server in Vancouver, Canada, you can now test your
URL in Dallas, USA, London, UK, and Sydney, Australia. Like the other test
options, log in to access this new functionality.

Compare URLs in different regions to see the difference in geo-targeted content,
CDN performance and load times.  Page Speed and YSlow scores shouldn't change
too much, but your page load times and waterfall graphs should.

HAR Diff

We've always wanted a way to easily compare the differences between two HAR
files and now it's possible with HAR Diff!  We've made an add-on to Jan
Odvarko's HAR Viewer (http://www.softwareishard.com/blog/har-viewer/) that
allows you to compare two waterfall graphs side-by-side.

You can see it in action here (be sure to view the larger version of it):

http://gtmetrix.com/compare/kkJrvNPv/jFNfForA/#report-timeline

This visual comparison can help highlight differences between two waterfalls
such as:

* The impact of latency on your pages and its resources from different locations
* Geo-targeted content
* Optimizations performed (eg. minified and combined files)
* Differences in browser loading

We have submitted some patches to the HAR Viewer project (which have already
been accepted) and we're getting the rest of the HAR Diff code ready for release
(it will be an open source add-on) so you can also add HAR Diffs to your project
too!

We would love to hear feedback from the community on HAR Diff so that we can
make it even better.

You can read more about HAR Diff here: http://gtmetrix.com/changes.html

Adrian

[Note: full post with links here:
http://tech.bluesmoon.info/2011/06/navigationtiming-ipv6-instant-pages-and.html]

There have been many additions to boomerang
(http://yahoo.github.com/boomerang/doc/)
over the last few months.  Among them include:

- Full navigation timing API support added by Buddy Brewer
- Measure IPv6 support and latency with the ipv6 plugin
- Measure the performance of "Instant Pages" in Google Chrome (v13+)


NavigationTiming
----------------

With the navtiming.js plugin, boomerang will beacon back the entire
navigation timing object for browsers that support it (Chrome and IE
and Firefox 6+ at this time).  Use this information to gain far more
insight into the user's browsing experience.

Docs here: http://yahoo.github.com/boomerang/doc/api/navtiming.html
and here: http://yahoo.github.com/boomerang/doc/howtos/howto-9.html


IPv6
----

World IPv6 day is past, but IPv6 support still isn't universal.  The
ipv6.js plugin will help you find out if your users can access content
over IPv6 and how that latency compares to whatever you currently
provide.  This does require server side setup though.

Docs here: http://yahoo.github.com/boomerang/doc/api/ipv6.html


Instant Pages
-------------

Google Chrome 13 has taken Mozilla's prefetch technology to the next
level, introducing "prerender" -- a method to download and render the
most likely next page before the user clicks on it, giving the
appearance of the page loading Instantly when the user does click.

Boomerang is now prerender aware, and will check to see if a page was
loaded through prerender or not.  If it was, then boomerang measures a
few more interesting times like the actual load time, the perceived load
time, and the time from prerender completing to the page becoming
visible.

Docs here:
http://yahoo.github.com/boomerang/doc/howtos/howto-10-page%231.html

Hi,

I am using YSlow 3.0.3 with Firefox 4.0.1 and Firebug 1.7.3.

First of all, thank you for this add-on, the advices are wise and we greatly
improved the performance of our websites thanks to it.

When will it be compatible with Firefox 5?

Also, CDN hostnames cannot contain '-' characters, otherwise they are not
recognized.

Kind regards,

Francis.

I've begun the task of optimizing our website and was planning on using YSlow
for the basic page weight and other metrics. However, I noticed that I am not
getting consistent page weights from one load to the next, even though content
has not changed. I make sure to empty my Firefox cache each time, but the weight
changes seemingly randomly from 1080k to 750k to anything inbetween. My
supervisor even got 450k and 0k results once. Pingdom.com is showing around
950k. Can anyone explain why this isnt consistent?

I also have a problem using YSlow (2.1.0) with downthemall (2.0.7). Downloads
fail with a size discrepancy error.

Hi Francis,

YSlow is now compatible with Firefox up to 6.* (
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/yslow/) starting today.

Regarding the "-" on CDN hostnames, I've just tested with
www.google-analytics.com and works for me, make sure you're following these
steps on http://developer.yahoo.com/yslow/faq.html#faq_cdn (make sure you
restart your firefox before running YSlow again).


Best,

Marcel




On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 2:44 AM, francis.pallini
<francis.pallini@...>wrote:

> **
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I am using YSlow 3.0.3 with Firefox 4.0.1 and Firebug 1.7.3.
>
> First of all, thank you for this add-on, the advices are wise and we
> greatly improved the performance of our websites thanks to it.
>
> When will it be compatible with Firefox 5?
>
> Also, CDN hostnames cannot contain '-' characters, otherwise they are not
> recognized.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Francis.
>
>
>



--
Marcel Duran


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Marcel,

Compatibility is great :-) However, I checked the FAQ and I still encounter the
same problem with CDNs:

  * YSlow 3.0.3 / Firefox 5.0 / Firebug 1.7.3
  * about:config / extensions.yslow.cdnHostnames =
static.experts-delphi.fr,www.google-analytics.com
  * Stopped Firefox, checked the process list, started Firefox
  * Ran a test on http://www.experts-delphi.fr/ and still:

Grade F on Use a Content Delivery Network (CDN)

There are 10 static components that are not on CDN.

Using these CDN hostnames from your preferences:
static.experts-delphi.fr,www.google-analytics.com

     static.experts-delphi.fr: 9 components, 246.8K (37.5K GZip)
     www.google-analytics.com: 1 component, 27.2K (11.7K GZip)

Did I miss something?

Regards,

Francis.

--- In exceptional-performance@yahoogroups.com, Marcel Duran <contact@...>
wrote:
>
> Hi Francis,
>
> YSlow is now compatible with Firefox up to 6.* (
> https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/yslow/) starting today.
>
> Regarding the "-" on CDN hostnames, I've just tested with
> www.google-analytics.com and works for me, make sure you're following these
> steps on http://developer.yahoo.com/yslow/faq.html#faq_cdn (make sure you
> restart your firefox before running YSlow again).
>
>
> Best,
>
> Marcel
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 2:44 AM, francis.pallini
> <francis.pallini@...>wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I am using YSlow 3.0.3 with Firefox 4.0.1 and Firebug 1.7.3.
> >
> > First of all, thank you for this add-on, the advices are wise and we
> > greatly improved the performance of our websites thanks to it.
> >
> > When will it be compatible with Firefox 5?
> >
> > Also, CDN hostnames cannot contain '-' characters, otherwise they are not
> > recognized.
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Francis.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Marcel Duran
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Hi,

I´ve found out that YSlow raises an error in the FF error console.

YSlow expects the object FirebugContext, which seems to be removed in
version 1.8:

see here:
http://code.google.com/p/fbug/source/detail?r=9768
<http://code.google.com/p/fbug/source/detail?r=9768>

By changing FirebugContext to Firebug.currentContext in the file:
/chrome/content/yslow-firebug.js  YSlow will work again.

Here is my diff:

26c26
< /*global YSLOW, Firebug, FBL, FirebugContext, content, TabWatcher*/
---
> /*global YSLOW, Firebug, FBL, Firebug.currentContext, content,
TabWatcher*/
74c74
<                 if
(!FirebugContext.getPanel("YSlow").document.yslowContext) {
---
>                 if
(!Firebug.currentContext.getPanel("YSlow").document.yslowContext) {
76c76
<                     panel = FirebugContext.getPanel("YSlow");
---
>                     panel = Firebug.currentContext.getPanel("YSlow");
78c78
<                     panel.document.yslowContext =
FirebugContext.yslowContext;
---
>                     panel.document.yslowContext =
Firebug.currentContext.yslowContext;
134c134
<                 if (win !== FirebugContext.window) {
---
>                 if (win !== Firebug.currentContext.window) {
137c137
<                     fbcontext = FirebugContext;
---
>                     fbcontext = Firebug.currentContext;
139c139
<                 // This cause initialNode to be called, thus creating
FirebugContext.yslowContext.
---
>                 // This cause initialNode to be called, thus creating
Firebug.currentContext.yslowContext.
155c155
<                 if (fbcontext !== FirebugContext) {
---
>                 if (fbcontext !== Firebug.currentContext) {
175c175
<                 if (win !== FirebugContext.window) {
---
>                 if (win !== Firebug.currentContext.window) {
178c178
<                     fbcontext = FirebugContext;
---
>                     fbcontext = Firebug.currentContext;
189c189
<                 if (fbcontext !== FirebugContext) {
---
>                 if (fbcontext !== Firebug.currentContext) {
208c208
<                 FirebugContext.getPanel("YSlow").createProgressBar();
---
>
Firebug.currentContext.getPanel("YSlow").createProgressBar();
212,213c212,213
<                 FirebugContext.getPanel("YSlow").removeProgressBar();
<                 FirebugContext.getPanel("YSlow").doView();
---
>
Firebug.currentContext.getPanel("YSlow").removeProgressBar();
>                 Firebug.currentContext.getPanel("YSlow").doView();
217c217
<
FirebugContext.getPanel("YSlow").setPeelProgress(event_object);
---
>
Firebug.currentContext.getPanel("YSlow").setPeelProgress(event_object);
221c221
<
FirebugContext.getPanel("YSlow").setFetchProgress(event_object);
---
>
Firebug.currentContext.getPanel("YSlow").setFetchProgress(event_object);
225c225
<                 YSLOW.controller.run(FirebugContext.window,
FirebugContext.yslowContext, false);
---
>                 YSLOW.controller.run(Firebug.currentContext.window,
Firebug.currentContext.yslowContext, false);
234c234
<
FirebugContext.getPanel("YSlow").doView("ysStatsButton");
---
>
Firebug.currentContext.getPanel("YSlow").doView("ysStatsButton");
239c239
<
FirebugContext.getPanel("YSlow").doView("ysPerfButton");
---
>
Firebug.currentContext.getPanel("YSlow").doView("ysPerfButton");
279c279
<                 YSLOW.latest_yslowContext =
FirebugContext.yslowContext;
---
>                 YSLOW.latest_yslowContext =
Firebug.currentContext.yslowContext;
283c283
<                 this.document.yslowContext =
FirebugContext.yslowContext;
---
>                 this.document.yslowContext =
Firebug.currentContext.yslowContext;



Best regards

Markus Feicht



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I wonder if I'm missing something obvious but I can't seem to figure out how to
find the actual errors that yslow finds.   I have it installed and can run it
and get a report.

If it tells me:
"1 iframe component with empty link were found" under 'Avoid empty src or href'

how do I determine where this code is that it's referring to?

I've searched for the answer to this for a while and can't seem to get more
details on errors other than that they exist.

Thanks!

Hi,

Great tool I really love it, but there seems to be a bug with the Tools.

I'm using FF 5.0 on Windows XP with Firebug 1.7.3 and Yslow 3.0.3 and if I click
any of the tools under the tools menu it simply opens a blank tab in Firefox and
that's it?

Is this a known bug and will there be a fix for it?

Thanks

Hi Everyone,

We have some great WPO meetups approaching in Boston.  If you are the area
you should check them out:

July 27th - Chris Bowen from Microsoft on IE9 and IE10 performance
improvements
August 24th - Mike Brittain from Etsy on performance culture and tools
September 21st - Mehdi Daoudi from Catchpoint with some performance
monitoring tales

RSVP for all of these here: http://www.meetup.com/Web-Performance-Boston/.
Hope to see you there!

-Jonathan


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Good morning,

I'm seeing a lot of 'failed to create temp dir' errors on the Smush.it service,
though they are intermitted.  Frequent enough to be causing some problems,
though.

Are you aware of any issues with the Smush.it service at the moment?

Cheers,
Alex

I wrote a blog post <http://www.indolering.com/load>  about my
frustrations with YSlow, but I will just quote my main point,

"However, my most serious complaint with Page Speed and YSlow is the way
they present their data.  From this pretty waterfall loading graph
<http://www.webpagetest.org/result/110209_HB_3VWA/1/details/>  one can
see that time spent downloading JS/CSS never goes over 1ms. The total
time *downloading* all JS/CSS is .033 seconds while time spent *waiting*
for the JS/CSS is 4.2 seconds: the majority of the entire page load
time.

To put that in perspective, all of the work one puts into compressing
the text and using a CDN saved about ~0.4 seconds while combining the
JS/CSS would save ~4.0 seconds.  The general recommendation checklists
YSlow and Page Speed offer are useful, but  they should report the
expected speed gains from any given change and prioritize according to a
time/benefit ratio.   Both tools weight their sub-scores, but they do
little to tell a  developer if it is worth their time and processing
power to bring their  etags in-line."

The exceptional-performance team and YSlow were really the first people
to bring attention to these issues.  I really do appreciate your work!

(If the link is considered spamming, go ahead and remove it : )



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hello there

I am being marked down for using jQuery Templates
These are in-line script tags which are used to template json data for display
on a mobile device

e.g.
<script id="movieTemplate" type="text/x-jquery-tmpl">
     {{tmpl "summaryTemplate"}}
     <tr><td>Director: ${Director}</td></tr>
</script>

should I be penalised for this or is there a way to declare my usage as ok?

Many thanks, Ant

In the "limitations" table at http://developer.yahoo.com/yslow/limitations/ ,
there is a column for HAR.  Is it possible to run yslow against a har file, and
if so is there any documentation or discussion on how to do this?  I'm
interested in running this server-side against har files that we're generating.

Thank you
Nathan

On Wednesday, 20 July 2011, indolering <zachlym@...> wrote:

> To put that in perspective, all of the work one puts into compressing
> the text and using a CDN saved about ~0.4 seconds while combining the
> JS/CSS would save ~4.0 seconds.  The general recommendation checklists
> YSlow and Page Speed offer are useful, but  they should report the
> expected speed gains from any given change and prioritize according to a
> time/benefit ratio.   Both tools weight their sub-scores, but they do
> little to tell a  developer if it is worth their time and processing
> power to bring their  etags in-line."
>

The actual benefit you'll get depends on where your users are, their
bandwidth, latency, browser, and other characteristics of their
computing set up.  This cannot be determined through static analysis.

--
hello world