- From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <frystyk@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 17:52:57 -0400
- To: Benjamin Franz <snowhare@netimages.com>, http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
At 12:16 PM 4/22/97 -0700, Benjamin Franz wrote: >My figures on www.xmission.com (a large server with many different >commercial and non-commercial residents) from a sample of 27 gigabytes of >recent measured traffic indicates that only about 13% of the traffic is >text/*. This slashes the potential savings to a mere 13% x 57.5% = 7.5% >from compressing the text/* files. And this overlooks the fact that the >majority of people browsing are doing so over modem links that *already* >perform pretty good on the fly compression of the data flowing through >them - thus reducing the potential savings to the end user from >pre-compressing text/* to negligible. Figures showing (potentially lack of) savings using compression compared to all other data formats are all very good, but is in fact not what our data results are all about. 1) In typical browsing mode, the very first packet on a connection contains an HTML page - the images are not requested until the HTML has arrived and started being parsed. TCPs behavior over time is a non-linear function where the first packet is much more expensive than the last. Therefore, it is likely to be a win to concentrate our efforts on the first packet. This is exactly what compressing HTML gives us. 2) Modem compression has on several occasions been indicated to have "pretty good" performance. Our data show otherwise - but not explicitly. I just made some simple tests of modem compression with and without deflated data and the figures are compelling - gaining about 2/3 in both time and packets when using deflate. Look at http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/Protocols/HTTP/Performance/Compression/PPP.html for details. Compression also helps on a LAN - see the figures at http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/Protocols/HTTP/Performance/Compression/LAN.html 3) On the more speculative side, I don't consider the current composition of data formats in caches being constant. The paper describes the potential benefits of using style sheets and other data formats than the more traditional gif and jpeg. Style sheets are just starting to be deployed and it may change the contents significantly over the next 6 months. CSS1 style style sheets compress just as well as HTML, so there is yet another point counting for compression. So, the _actual_data_ that we have now for the effect of compression seems to indicate with little doubt that it is worth doing! Thanks, Henrik -- Henrik Frystyk Nielsen, <frystyk@w3.org> World Wide Web Consortium, MIT/LCS NE43-346 545 Technology Square, Cambridge MA 02139, USA
Received on Tuesday, 22 April 1997 14:57:57 UTC