> > TiddlyTweeter <tiddly...@assays.tv <javascript:>> suggested: >
> I think a few tests showing the benefit of GZippery on this might help >> show a larger core is not, in itself, a major issue for most use cases. > > Jeremy Ruston replied: > GZip is enabled for tiddlywiki.com, so an interesting test case is to > look at https://tiddlywiki.com/upgrade.html; it’s the largest html file > on tiddlywiki.com because it includes a copy of every > plugin/theme/language for upgrade purposes. > > Using the “Network” tab of developer tools, the HTML file shows as taking > 16.5MB on disc, but only 4.3MB when it is transmitted by the server in its > compressed form. > Ciao Jeremy Good example! Basically proves the point that for online performance, particularly for the important *user experience of "load time"* , it is not core *size* per se that is often the issue. It is simply about knowing how to leverage server to optimally use commonly available methods for reduced bandwidth delivery. Best wishes TT -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/cc95e36a-8ce1-411f-ac6d-21f599750303o%40googlegroups.com.
