Pingdom Web test.

Post here if your message doesn't fit into another forum but is still about web development. Includes site critiques, web hosting and server questions, helpful software and resources, and more.
Post Reply
User avatar
RSteinwand
Rank VI - Professional
Rank VI - Professional
Posts: 591
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2008 2:12 pm
Location: Fargo, ND
Contact:

Pingdom Web test.

Post by RSteinwand » Mon Oct 30, 2017 1:15 pm

https://tools.pingdom.com

I only get a "C" for cookieless domain, but that'll be fixed with the new web site/domain. It's expensive buying new certs when they don't expire for another year. :roll: Otherwise everything else I'm being penalized for is Google's fault. (Stupid YouTube video.)

I like this part: Faster than 93 % of tested sites. :mrgreen:
Rick

User avatar
RSteinwand
Rank VI - Professional
Rank VI - Professional
Posts: 591
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2008 2:12 pm
Location: Fargo, ND
Contact:

Re: Pingdom Web test.

Post by RSteinwand » Mon Oct 30, 2017 1:30 pm

Haha... Albert, you have the same problem. A little faster than me too.
Rick

User avatar
Albert Wiersch
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3316
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 9:23 am
Location: Near Dallas, TX
Contact:

Re: Pingdom Web test.

Post by Albert Wiersch » Tue May 22, 2018 11:22 am

Waking this topic back up...

I tested my website from Melbourne, Australia (a US site made me wait in a queue then failed).

Looks like my current performance grade for www.htmlvalidator.com is "A" (94). Load time is 2.67s... but only faster than 58% of sites (maybe because I checked from the Australian server?). I thought it might be faster given how many sites are bloated these days but I'm fine with less than 3 seconds.

Looks likes DNS took up a nice chunk of that time.

It does have very nice info and graphs.

Here's the shared results:
https://tools.pingdom.com/#!/cbyxUs/htt ... idator.com
This specific test was done on May 22 at 11:07:32 from Melbourne, Australia. The web page took 2.67 s to load, used 21 requests, and weighed in at 138.5 kB.

The Google Page Speed performance grade for this web page is 94/100.
Image
Albert Wiersch

User avatar
RSteinwand
Rank VI - Professional
Rank VI - Professional
Posts: 591
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2008 2:12 pm
Location: Fargo, ND
Contact:

Re: Pingdom Web test.

Post by RSteinwand » Tue May 22, 2018 11:28 am

Rick

User avatar
Albert Wiersch
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3316
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 9:23 am
Location: Near Dallas, TX
Contact:

Re: Pingdom Web test.

Post by Albert Wiersch » Tue May 22, 2018 11:29 am

RSteinwand wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 11:28 am
New York is your friend. https://tools.pingdom.com/#!/d2wwt6/htt ... idator.com
Wow... that's a HUGE difference. Thanks New York! :D
Image
Albert Wiersch

User avatar
RSteinwand
Rank VI - Professional
Rank VI - Professional
Posts: 591
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2008 2:12 pm
Location: Fargo, ND
Contact:

Re: Pingdom Web test.

Post by RSteinwand » Tue May 22, 2018 11:33 am

Our home page is lighter after the name change (May 1st) and site refresh. Removal of youtube and a bunch of images in our slider helped a lot. (We slide text now instead of images and half the background image is a css gradient.) So our score has improved. Still have a bunch of things to update too, but most won't be noticed.

https://tools.pingdom.com/#!/eoJe88/htt ... otapay.com

Could use HTTP/2 to improve it. :?
Rick

User avatar
Albert Wiersch
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3316
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 9:23 am
Location: Near Dallas, TX
Contact:

Re: Pingdom Web test.

Post by Albert Wiersch » Tue May 22, 2018 11:54 am

That's not bad at all. Can't complain about a 99. I noticed no DNS lookup in the graph... I guess it was already cached.

But yes, definitely should go HTTP/2 if you aren't already (your score still looks great to me even if you aren't using HTTP/2 yet).
Image
Albert Wiersch

User avatar
RSteinwand
Rank VI - Professional
Rank VI - Professional
Posts: 591
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2008 2:12 pm
Location: Fargo, ND
Contact:

Re: Pingdom Web test.

Post by RSteinwand » Tue May 22, 2018 12:11 pm

Can't do HTTP/2 without updating OS on 3 web servers. It's actually more complicated than it sounds, since there's licensing on other products that drive the cost waay up. If it was just a simple OS update, we might have done it, but mgmt isn't sold on HTTP/2 being worth the cost to update. Maybe if our site wasn't already highly optimized, the benefits would be larger and worth it.<rolls eyes>

TBH, I haven't done any tweaking since the refresh either so I imagine there's css to remove and other things I could update. All I've done is test and saw improvement and no issues.
Rick

User avatar
Albert Wiersch
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3316
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 9:23 am
Location: Near Dallas, TX
Contact:

Re: Pingdom Web test.

Post by Albert Wiersch » Tue May 22, 2018 1:18 pm

That stinks that the cost is a lot. I can understand how the costs might not be worth the benefits if you have to pay a lot in licensing costs. For me it was mostly just updating the server and software, turning it on, and doing some testing, which just took time. The server is Linux and server is Apache (with PHP) so there was no money cost.

But still, your performance score seemed impressive to me. I wonder how much better it would be with HTTP/2... but it might not be much better since it seems that you have done a good job optimizing.

Maybe by the time you get to updating the OS's, HTTP/3 will be out. :D
Image
Albert Wiersch

User avatar
RSteinwand
Rank VI - Professional
Rank VI - Professional
Posts: 591
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2008 2:12 pm
Location: Fargo, ND
Contact:

Re: Pingdom Web test.

Post by RSteinwand » Tue May 22, 2018 1:26 pm

Albert Wiersch wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 1:18 pm
Maybe by the time you get to updating the OS's, HTTP/3 will be out. :D
LOL. But it'll be worth it.
Rick

Post Reply