- From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <henrikn@microsoft.com>
- Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 14:49:35 +0000
- To: Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>
- CC: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Patrick, Bjoern asked a similar question and so I computed the "just concatenation plus compression" numbers listed in [1] but included here for convenience: Compressing 6 CSS individually: 77495 bytes Compressing the minified CSS bundle: 69803 bytes Compression the 6 concatenated files: 75230 bytes The size difference is still noticeable (75230 - 69803 = 5427 bytes): Henrik [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2012AprJun/0785.html -----Original Message----- From: Patrick McManus [mailto:pmcmanus@mozilla.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 05:29 To: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org Subject: RE: Performance implications of Bundling and Minification on HTTP/1.1 On Mon, 2012-06-25 at 20:12 +0000, Henrik Frystyk Nielsen wrote: > Patrick, Thanks Henrik, I was just trying to tease out the byte savings of minification, vs bundling, vs compression in all of their combinations which the blog post didn't get into.. > Are you thinking of externalizing the compression dictionary and reuse it across resources? It's a possibility to consider - that's all. SPDY already does it with headers. I could imagine having a small set of dictionaries for different classes of content (headers, markup, etc..).. I'm not advocating that here, just trying to scrounge info from your data points :)
Received on Tuesday, 26 June 2012 14:50:53 UTC