Tool to determine how long an HTTP request takes till finish - http

I need a tool to determine how long it takes the page to be fully loaded (from the start of my HTTP request), preferably something that can be run client-side and (not critical) permits logging for statistics.
Is there such a thing?
Thanks

Firefox with the Firebug add-on. Does the initial page load along with separating each type of item and individual items (like images, js, etc). It also measures XHR requests individually.

Fiddler http://www.fiddler2.com/fiddler2/ as well as one of its add-ons: http://www.fiddler2.com/fiddler2/addons/neXpert.asp do this and much more. Here is a demo of the Fiddler add on which even makes recommendations for performance tuning based on this information: https://msevents.microsoft.com/CUI/WebCastEventDetails.aspx?EventID=1032398774&EventCategory=5&culture=en-US&CountryCode=US.

IE9 developer tools > Network tab

Related

Google Page Speed Insight Shows In-Consistent Results

I have a wordpress website running and i am using W3Total Cache Plug-in to make the site load faster. When i scan the site in Google Page Speed Insight, i noticed i am getting in-consistent scan results. I have a Facebook Messenger chat floating on the webpage and a google map. Since these two gave me Reduce the impact of third-party code Warning i have made changes so that these two will be loaded only after the DOM has loaded completely. Actually i have used jQuery SetTimeOut for this. I actually managed to remove the warning from the result by doing this. But now and then i noticed the same warning coming back in, even if i have made adjustments. if i scan the site two or three times frequently the warnong may go off, but will be back again once i try after a while.
These are the result of frequent scans. Do you guys have any idea about what would be going wrong here ? I spent a lot of time searching but couldn't get my head around it.
With the classic HTTP/1.0 Hypertext Transfer Protocol, resources like Javascript, CSS, HTML, images etc. are loaded in a request / response pair, meaning the browser sends a request to request for a resource (be it CSS, Javascript, etc.), and will wait for the response to come back before it requests another resource. Even though they are loaded in a request / response pair, the request and response pairs are not always going to follow the same sequence strictly, due to randomness in network latency, server response time, the load of the server is currently experiencing, etc.
With HTTP/2 and HTTP/3, the newer versions of HTTP protocols, instead of waiting for a response to come back before sending another request, the requests can be sent all at once. I checked your website and saw that your website is using HTTP/2 and HTTP/3. With HTTP/2 and HTTP/3 protocols, since requests can be sent all at once, it can contribute to a degree of "inconsistency" as well, among other things. Even with HTTP 1, there's always a degree of randomness since there are many factors that play into it like the server response time is going to be different, the network latency is going to be different, etc.
To illustrate this, if you are using the Chrome browser, open the "Developer Tools" tab by clicking the three dots on the very top right corner of the browser, and then click "More Tools" and then click "Developer Tools". Alternatively, you can do "Ctrl+Shift+I" if you use Windows or "Command + Option + I" on Mac. Then go to its "Network" tab, and refresh the page. Each time you refresh the page, the resources are loaded a bit different in sequence:
In the image above, using the Google Tag Manager UA-174548329-1 Javascript as an example (I know it's probably not Google Map), it is loaded as the 4th resource.
When I refresh the page again, your Google Tag Manager UA-174548329-1 Javascript is loaded as the 11th resource:
When the page is being loaded or if you run it on Google's PageSpeed Insight, the main thread is sometimes busy, sometimes not, due to the nature of the randomness of the request and response. Your main thread is also constructing the DOM, and doing a lot of work. Sometimes it's getting blocked by render-blocking resources, such as Javascript.
Javascript is always going to block the Critical Rendering Path by default. Without looking at your Javascript SetTimeOut it's hard to say what implementation you are using to delay your Javascript but it's safe to assume that it probably doesn't help with clearing the critical rendering path. Instead of using SetTimeOut, you should use defer or async.
You can look more into the Critical Rendering Path here. The main thread is the main process your browser is running to do most of the work to process and render the CSS, Javascript, HTML on a page. The critical rendering path is "the sequence of steps the browser goes through to convert the HTML, CSS, and JavaScript into pixels on the screen". - Quoted from Critical Rendering Path. The critical rendering path is the sequence of your Javascript, HTML, CSS, images, and other resources being downloaded and rendered. It requires a lot of knowledge to optimize your critical rendering path and it's no easy job. However there are two attributes you can try to use in the script tag, namely "async" and "defer" to control when your Javascript will be executed.
Take a look at this image:
Credit: Growing with the Web
https://developers.google.com/web/fundamentals/performance/optimizing-content-efficiency/loading-third-party-javascript/?utm_source=lighthouse&utm_medium=unknown
As you can see, you can try putting the async attribute in your script or the defer attribute in your script tag and see if it helps.
With 'async' attribute in the script tag, it means that your Javascript will be executed asynchronously as soon as it's downloaded. The blue bar under the <script async> as shown in the image shows that the script is downloaded at the same time when the HTML is being parsed as well, since the green bar and the blue bar are seen executing in parallel. As soon as the downloading of the script is finished, the script is then executed. At this point, the HTML parsing is paused until the script is finished executing. Whereas without the 'async' attribute, your HTML parsing will be paused (or blocked) when the script is being downloaded and executed.
With 'defer' attribute in the script tag, it means you are deferring the execution of your Javascript until the DOM is finished parsing. Although it will be downloaded as soon as the browser receives the javascript resource, but the downloading won't block the HTML parsing.
In summary, you can use the 'async' attribute in your third party script to 'unblock' your main thread to a certain degree, that they will be downloaded and executed in the background while your DOM is being rendered. This will speed up the main thread a bit. However one caveat is that the execution is still going to be render-blocking. A very important thing to note is that by using the 'async' attribute, be prepared to see some possible erratic behaviors of the page because, more 'inconsistencies' might happen as now the Javascript can be executed anytime in the rendering path and therefore if something needs to happen before or after the script, you might break the flow and the logic of it.
Or you can use the 'defer' attribute in your third party script to tell your script to be executed only after the DOM has been loaded completely. This can only speed up the process very little, only a little because the downloading of the script can now happen in parallel while the HTML parsing is taking place vs using the default script tag without specifying defer or async, but the execution is still going to take an overhead on the main thread.
As per Google's support document, there's a section on How do you load third-party script efficiently?, here are a few ways:
"
Load the script using the async or defer attribute to avoid blocking document parsing.
Consider self-hosting the script if the third-party server is slow.
Consider removing the script if it doesn't add clear value to your site.
Consider Resource Hints like <link rel=preconnect> or <link rel=dns-prefetch> to perform a DNS lookup for domains hosting third-party scripts.
"
Other methods:
Check out how to compress, minify, or combine various Javascript files into one file (if you are using Javascript in the form of files). Use GZIP compression to compress your Javascript, CSS. Also check out how to load third party scripts using a CDN (Content Delivery Network / Content Distribution Network), among others.
Updated Aug 12, 2020:
In response to your comment, since you mentioned that your third party scripts are coming from plugins that you can't code the 'async' or 'defer' attribute into the script tags, you can consider adding this before your other scripts:
<script>
// If your script tag has an id, use either one below:
document.getElementById("your_script_tag_id").async = true;
document.getElementById("your_script_tag_id").defer = true;
// If your script tag has a class name, use either one below:
document.getElementsByClassName("your_script_tag_class_name")[0].async = true;
document.getElementsByClassName("your_script_tag_class_name")[0].defer = true;
// If for once and for all scripts, use either one below:
document.getElementsByTagName("script")[0].async = true;
document.getElementsByTagName("script")[0].defer = true;
</script>
You can also check this out: Async JavaScript, this allows you to defer or async your Javascripts including the third party ones.
From what I can see you have set the "delay" to 3 seconds on Facebook Messenger chat. However your site takes a lot longer than this to load the initial content.
Your site will often not have loaded the "above the fold" content within 3 seconds due to things like network latency, load on your server etc.
For this reason the Facebook Messenger chat script is getting loaded at a point where the CPU may or may not be busy. For things like "Total Blocking Time" this is important as that is listening for when the CPU has it's first quiet period to work out when the page is usable.
For working out "impact of third party code" it is looking at when the CPU is working while trying to render the "above the fold" content, hence why sometimes it shows as an impact and other times it does not as sometimes your above the fold content has loaded sufficiently before the Facebook Messenger is initialised.
Additionally you have to consider when your main JS file containing the timeout is loaded, sometimes it will be loaded sooner depending on latency etc. so this will impact the time the fbDiv is added as well.
There is a lot to cover so to simplify the answer (as there is an awful lot to explain as to why this happens) is to increase the delay on Facebook Messenger or only have it load on a button click.
For example you could have a button that says "chat with us" and then use the click event to load facebook messenger (and hide the "chat with us" button). This would be my recommendation
Alternatively looking at the load speed on your site you could set the delay to about 7 seconds and it would then (probably) be consistent.

How to determine if a mobile browser is meta-refresh capable?

Many browsers in Japan (EZWeb, i-mode, etc) don't allow meta refresh, and in fact, they may display warning messages such as "This page uses newer technology and cannot be displayed" in place of your webpage.
How can I tell if a mobile browser does not support meta-refreshing so that I can take different action in those cases?
Thanks
The best option for something like this is to display a link on the page with the meta-refresh. The traditional "click here if the page doesn't redirect you in 5 seconds" kind of thing. That's what has been done for years in the PC realm.
You should also consider an HTTP 304 with the Location: header if you are just redirecting.
If instead you want a page to reload after a specific amount of time, then you are stuck. Without JavaScript, there is no other method you can use to automatically do this.
Without JavaScript you're really limited to User Agent sniffing. To provide the best experience I would recommend use known UA strings to only send the meta-refresh to browsers you know can handle it and for those that you don't know send a plain HTML response that has a link for users to click on to do the refresh.

How can I verify that overall a site is faster after compression has been switched on?

I have suggested that we Enable dynamic content compression on IIS7 to improve user experience. The QA department wants me to demonstrate that it is in fact faster. I've been using Firebug to view the load time waterfall chart generated under the Net setting and it is inconsistent with the overall (total) page load time from page to page. i.e. sometimes faster but sometimes slower.
Dynamic pages by themselves are always faster but now some static uncompressed content appears to be slower.
What I would like is a tool (Firefox addin) that can add together all page load times during a typical workflow (usage) of a site and give me a final time figure. I would then use that with dynamic compression enabled and disabled to see what the total net effect is. Any suggestions?
Use Fiddler from Microsoft, it has a much low level interaction with Explorer and could be easily used to produce comparative graphics.
Firebug is very useful for a lot of stuff, but for every kind of measurement that involves network Fiddler is much better because instead of examining the page it works as a local proxy and so can examine the network traffic much better.
Site link: http://www.fiddler2.com/fiddler2/
The Net tab in Firebug gives you timings for every item the browser downloads. There's also an option to disable the cache, to guarantee accurate timings. I believe that by default it will clear the timings after every page load, but that can be disabled.

Can I copy the list of HTTP requests made by a web page out of Firebug’s Net panel?

In the Firebug Net panel, you can get a list of all HTTP requests made for the current page.
http://getfirebug.com/wiki/index.php/Net_Panel
Is there a way copy this list as text, so that I can paste it somewhere else for my own records? I’m doing some optimisation work, and it’d be really handy to save the requests made for pages before I optimise, so that I can check what effect my optimisation has.
Alternatively, are there any other tools that would give me the same file information (i.e. URL of file requested, size of file — I don’t need the timeline stuff that Firebug’s Net panel does) as Firebug, in text format?
FireBug NetExport extension is what you're looking for.
HttpFox provides a list of HTTP requests made by a web page, and lets you copy the list out as text.
It doesn’t provide the nice breakdowns that Firebug does (e.g. CSS, images, etc.), but the data is there.
LiveHTTPHeaders will also do this, try the generator tab for a concise list of the requests.

How to speed up Google adsense and analytics loading time?

This might fall under the category of "you can't", but I thought it might be prudent to at least see if there is something I can do about this.
According to FireBug, the major bottleneck in my page loading times seems to be a gap between the loading of the html and the loading of Google adsense and analytics. Notice in the screenshot below that the initial GET only takes 214 ms, and that adsense + analytics loading takes roughly 130 ms combined. However, the entire page load time is 1.12 seconds due to that large pause in between the initial GET and the adsense/analytics loading.
If it makes any difference at all, the site is running off of the ASP.NET MVC RC1 stack.
alt text http://kevinwilliampang.com/pics/firebug.jpg
Update: After removing adsense and analytics, I'm still seeing a slow response time. Hovering over the initial GET request, I see that the following speeds: 96ms Receiving Data, 736ms DOMContentLoaded (event), 778ms 'load' (event). I'm guessing then that the performance is a result of my own jQuery javascript that has processing tied to the ($document).ready() event?
You should place your analytics code at the bottom of the page so that everything else loads first. Other than that, I don't think there's much you can do.
edit: Actually, I just found this interesting blog post on a way to speed up analytics by hosting your own urchin.js file. Maybe it's worth a look.
I've never seen anything like that using Firebug on Stack Overflow and we use Analytics as well.
I just ran a trace and I see the request for the
http://www.google-analytics.com/__utm.gif?...
Happening directly after the DOMContentLoaded event (the blue line). So I'd suspect the AdSense, first. Have you tried disabling that?
As it goes, I happen to have rather heavily researched this just this week. Long story short, you are screwed. As others have said the best you can do is put it at the bottom of the list of requests and make the rest of your code depend on ready rather than onload events - jQuery is really good here. Some portion of the js is static, so you could clone that locally if you keep an eye on it for maintenance purposes.
The google code isn't quite as helpful as it could be in this area*, but it's their ballgame and anything you do to change it is going to be both complex and risky. In theory, wrapping with a non-blocking script call in the header is possible, but would be unlikely to gain you a benefit given the additional abstraction, and ultimately with adsense your payload is an html source, not script.
* it's possible google have a good reason, but nothing I can deduce from the code they expose
Probably not anything you can do aside from putting those includes right before the closing body tag, if you haven't already. JavaScript includes block parallel HTTP requests which is why they should be kept out of <head>
Surely Google's servers will be the fastest part of the loading, given that your ISP and most ISPs will have a local cache of the files too?
You could inject the script into the head on page load perhaps, but I'm not sure how that effects urchin.js.
Could be that your page simply takes that long to parse? It seems nothing network-related is happening. It simply waits around a second before the adsense/analytics requests are even fired off.
I don't suppose you have a few hundred tables on the page or something? ;)

Resources