Hi there,
On 30 Apr 2003 at 17:21:52 +0200, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> > Maybe I am a bit slow today but I don't see any coherence
> > between a couple of small image files and a performance
> > penalty (if there is such a thing).
>
> One big file = small overhead = little performance penatly
> Many small files = big overhead = ??? performance penalty
Okay, I have thought in totaly wrong direction ;-)
For each picture one http request and one answer is needed.
This means your computer has to send one IP packet and it
has to receive _at least_ one IP packet for each file. It
will receive propably more than one packet since if your are
on an ethernet the maximum transfer unit (MTU), which is the
maximum size of an IP packet, should be set to 1500
bytes. This is the size which can pass the ethernet
connection directly. If the MTU is set to a larger value the
overhead is even more.
The IP4 header is between 20 (very likely) and 60 Bytes in
size, which gives a relation to the data to transmit of
about data/overhead = 75..25 on large files. The pager icons
are between 200 and 1000 Bytes in size which gives a data
overhead relation of about 50..3 (worst case - 60 Bytes
header and 200 bytes data).
I think http and lower network layers as ethernet do not
have a big overhead - but I am not that sure :-)
> > Have you checked the render times by using a local version
> > of the web page? You may save the web page with mozilla and
> > load it again afterwards.
>
> I'd have to learn how to set up apache first. :-(
Not really - To check this you can store the pages and its
images with
wget -r --level=1 --relative --no-parent \
http://www.fvwm.org/index.php \
http://www.fvwm.org/pictures/decorations/window_deco_simple_steelblue/
This downloads about 700 kB which includes index.php and all
relative liked pages. The additional window decoration is
needed since wget does not obey to css definitions.
wget should put it to the local directory ./www.fvwm.org/
from where you can load index.php in your browser. If your
browser does not know what to do with file extension .php
you might need to change is to html.
> Yeah. I would think choosing a clever order of the
> components lessens that problem. Maybe an invisible
> placeholder for the pager first?
Bob made a workaraound which might lessen the problem. But I
don't think much since as he said the problem is that the
pager contains text which size depends on the user's browser
settings.
Another possibility would be to use one ready (generated)
picture for the whole pager. Links could be declared with a
image map. Currently this is not supported by the navgen
concept at all and would make hilighting pages difficult. We
might think about if and how this could be done using the
current concept.
Regards, Uwe
--
,_, Uwe Pross
(O,O) mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
( ) http://www.tu-chemnitz.de/~uwp
=-"-"-================================
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.fvwm.org/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the
body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To report problems, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
