Sebastian Korfmann wrote:
>
>
> I've been wondering if the assumption of four asset hosts for the sake of
> speed improvements is still valid.
>
And Jeremy Kemper wrote:
> Domain sharding is still useful but our guidance is outdated. It's
> from a pre-SSL-everywhere, pre-SPDY era where browsers
Domain sharding is still useful but our guidance is outdated. It's
from a pre-SSL-everywhere, pre-SPDY era where browsers had low
per-domain connection caps.
http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/2013/09/05/domain-sharding-revisited/
http://blog.cloudflare.com/using-cloudflare-to-mix-domain-sharding-an
*## On Perf Changes*
Any performance improvements that have wide implications such as this, need
to be benchmarked before they could be merged.
It's not enough to do the research, we would need actual experimental proof
that it works, provides a significant speed boost to justify the extra code
c
Hey there,
I've been wondering if the assumption of four asset hosts for the sake of
speed improvements is still valid.
Rails documentation about asset hosts:
Browsers typically open at most two simultaneous connections to a single
> host, which means your assets often have to wait for other
