On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 8:33 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: > > On 23/06/2012, at 6:08 AM, Roberto Peon wrote: > > > I'd argue another point. > > The amount of work necessary to optimize site performance for HTTP/1.1 > today is large. The amount of knowledge necessary to do it properly is also > large. > > This is not the way it should be! > +1 > > > > The protocol should make it easier to do things right, and it should > help in the (extremely frequent and likely) case that the site designer > gets it wrong in little ways. > > This is definitely an area that should be discussed. I've heard a few > people express skepticism about multiplexing overall, because it requires > the server to prioritise what's in the pipe, which in turn requires greater > knowledge (and probably a bucketload of heuristics). > Right now those heuristics are applied to how browsers make requests, but > at least the data is applied in the same place it's most usefully sourced, > and of course there are fewer browser implementations than there are server > deployments (which is potentially the level that this kind of tuning would > need to take place for multiplexing). > > Discuss :) > I'm a bit surprised people express much skepticism. Basic heuristics can get you a long way. For example, simply prioritizing html/js/css over other resources like images does a lot. Remember that the majority of implementations, including Chromium's and Google's, are still in the early stages of optimization. > -- > Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/ > > > >
Received on Tuesday, 26 June 2012 04:20:38 UTC