Login ProductsSalesSupportDownloadsAbout |
Home » Technical Support » Elevate Web Builder Technical Support » Support Forums » Elevate Web Builder General » View Thread |
Messages 1 to 10 of 15 total |
BPL like deploy |
Sun, Mar 31 2013 5:08 PM | Permanent Link |
Leslie | Tim,
I was wondering if deploying the EWB components (which do not change often) as a separate file would make loading faster? Especially mobile devices could benifit from being large part of the code already cached, maybe even compiled. Cheers, Leslie |
Mon, Apr 1 2013 3:46 AM | Permanent Link |
Matthew Jones | See my thread on "Redundant code" for the detailed explanation of why the way it is
is better. Primarily a single file, optimised for what is used, is faster for the devices. /Matthew Jones/ |
Mon, Apr 1 2013 2:27 PM | Permanent Link |
Leslie | Thanks Matthew, it made the picture clearer. I still would like to see/do some tests at one point to compare the actual speed difference. Compiling the stripped code of the library could be significantly slower than having the precompiled version ready in cache. The best approach I can think of would be a mixed one: if there is a way to check the presence of the full version of the library a loader can load either just the app code or the one file version with the stripped library. Once it is done it can start downloading the full version in the background as a preparation for the next time. This way we could probably have the advantages of both ways with no performance penalty at all.
Cheers, Leslie |
Mon, Apr 1 2013 2:34 PM | Permanent Link |
Leslie | Maybe the stripped version of the library can be executed somewhat faster then the full version. If so there can be some performance penalty for using the full version of the lib in the case when all files are fully cached. I would guess this is not much, but only profiling can tell it for sure.
Cheers, Leslie |
Mon, Apr 1 2013 2:47 PM | Permanent Link |
Leslie | This is something I have googled and could very well be unrelated, but I do not have the time now to evaluate its relevance for the subject:
http://lostechies.com/derickbailey/2012/04/10/javascript-performance-pre-compiling-and-caching-html-templates/ Cheers, Leslie |
Mon, Apr 1 2013 2:55 PM | Permanent Link |
Raul Team Elevate | Leslie,
Considering the current small size of the EWB compressed JS file i'm not convinced it's even worth the effort to measure yet. I have 2 app deployed and the compressed js is less than 500K in both cases. This is lot less than any average web page i visit (even mobile ones). Assuming server has compression enabled also the actual data sent would be a lot less. Deployment size is always something to think about but looking at real world numbers at the moment i don't see a need for this yet. If EWB keeps growing and apps gets larger then maybe but otherwise this seems like a case of premature optimization. Raul On 4/1/2013 2:27 PM, Leslie wrote: > Thanks Matthew, it made the picture clearer. I still would like to see/do some tests at one point to compare the actual speed difference. Compiling the stripped code of the library could be significantly slower than having the precompiled version ready in cache. The best approach I can think of would be a mixed one: if there is a way to check the presence of the full version of the library a loader can load either just the app code or the one file version with the stripped library. Once it is done it can start downloading the full version in the background as a preparation for the next time. This way we could probably have the advantages of both ways with no performance penalty at all. |
Mon, Apr 1 2013 4:52 PM | Permanent Link |
Tim Young [Elevate Software] Elevate Software, Inc. timyoung@elevatesoft.com | Leslie,
<< Thanks Matthew, it made the picture clearer. I still would like to see/do some tests at one point to compare the actual speed difference. Compiling the stripped code of the library could be significantly slower than having the precompiled version ready in cache. The best approach I can think of would be a mixed one: if there is a way to check the presence of the full version of the library a loader can load either just the app code or the one file version with the stripped library. Once it is done it can start downloading the full version in the background as a preparation for the next time. This way we could probably have the advantages of both ways with no performance penalty at all. >> What you're missing is that the application JS is already compressed *and* cached (after the first load). So, unless your application code is constantly changing, there really isn't much of a benefit to having the runtime library split out since the application will already be cached for the user in the same way that you expect the runtime library to be. Tim Young Elevate Software www.elevatesoft.com |
Mon, Apr 1 2013 5:00 PM | Permanent Link |
Tim Young [Elevate Software] Elevate Software, Inc. timyoung@elevatesoft.com | Leslie,
<< This is something I have googled and could very well be unrelated, but I do not have the time now to evaluate its relevance for the subject: >> It is unrelated. They're talking about pre-compiling JS/HTML code for use as templates. What you want is this discussion: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1096907/do-browsers-parse-javascript-on-every-page-load and this: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/889195/do-browsers-compile-and-cache-javascript Tim Young Elevate Software www.elevatesoft.com |
Mon, Apr 1 2013 5:40 PM | Permanent Link |
Leslie | Tim,
what I would like to speed up is exately the first time loading/reloading. My first project with EWB was a webshop, the first time experience matters there. I am sure there is no performance issue with the PC's of late, but the target should be the low end android handsets and tablets. And that's where optimization does matter. I understand that EWB has not been optimized for mobiles yet, but I always do the user experience tests on the weakest targeted hardware so I have checked. It was simply too slow. It got me thinking about optimizing load speed. Till that point the speed was mostly satisfying. The speed of the development is especially great, I really enjoy developing with EWB, Cheers, Leslie |
Mon, Apr 1 2013 5:45 PM | Permanent Link |
Leslie | Raul,
you may be right but I still would like to see the numbers. Have you tested your apps with low end mobiles or tablets? Cheers, Leslie |
Page 1 of 2 | Next Page » | |
Jump to Page: 1 2 |
This web page was last updated on Friday, April 19, 2024 at 07:09 AM | Privacy PolicySite Map © 2024 Elevate Software, Inc. All Rights Reserved Questions or comments ? E-mail us at info@elevatesoft.com |