Yeah, I guess I'm not convinced that for a portal, the table printed out
really represents an "F" grade.  I'd worry most about requests after the
very first one, since the portal is intended to be an interactive
environment.  The model of optimizing for repeat requests also seems to fit
the choices we've made in the backend as well.  Some of the
channels/portlets tend to be slow on the very first request, then improve as
their contents are cached.

If you're on the admin first tab, some of the javascript may be coming from
the calendar channel, not from the portal itself.  I'd recommend maybe
trying the tool on an empty tab to see what's being included by the
framework.

Half of the download appears to be images, so all of that will be dependent
on your skinning choices, as well.  You could always choose to have a skin
which doesn't use images for tabs, etc.

- Jen


On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 9:51 AM, Eric Dalquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

>  Also as for the performance, I'd be interested to see what YSlow
> recommends for fixing the performance problems. Your table looks pretty good
> ... we know that with an empty cache it is a large first hit, this is the
> reality that comes with people wanting a dynamic user-interface. The primed
> cache shows one CSS file being loaded and the portal content being loaded,
> I'm not what else could be done to improve performance out-of-the-box there.
> I'd imagine setting some agressive cache headers may help cut down on the
> number of requests but there is some significant implications in doing that
> around people doing development work, future changes to those files and
> container/http-server compatibility. I'd be very interested to hear
> suggestions for how to improve that rating.
>
> -Eric
>

-- 
You are currently subscribed to [email protected] as: [EMAIL 
PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see 
http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/uportal-dev

Reply via email to