[thelist] CSS-Based page loading SLOWER than table-based page?

[Lee Kowalkowski]

On 07/08/07, Jon Hughes <hughesj at firemtn.com> wrote:
> http://img505.imageshack.us/img505/6761/cssversionnm1.gif <-- CSS
> Version
> http://img130.imageshack.us/img130/3610/tableversionzp7.gif <-- Table
> Version
>
> Thank You,
> - Jon Hughes

Weird, I take it those grey "cigarette ash" parts indicate load time?
Why are they generally much shorter on the CSS version than the table
version?

In a fair comparison I'd expect them to be pretty much constant.  I
mean, tables or not, your images load times should be consistent?

Although it does seem that the overall CSS load time was significantly
less (which means the images might have been cached) - it just looks
like there was considerably more latency.

It looks like this latency doesn't actually surface until after the
main document has loaded, which is why it can be seen much earlier in
the CSS graph.  But the same is also evident in the table's graph -
once the main document has finished loading.

Perhaps whilst there's an existing connection open there's some
optimisation for new connections or even HTTP pipelining, but once
there are no large files being requested, the connections are closing.
 That's how it would appear.  Do you know if your server is closing
the persistent connections?

Perhaps this is why the load times are looking faster in the CSS
graph, because the connections are not being shared.

Have you tried a different browser?

-- 
Lee