Copied to clipboard

Flag this post as spam?

This post will be reported to the moderators as potential spam to be looked at


  • MartinB 411 posts 512 karma points
    Jan 15, 2011 @ 01:20
    MartinB
    0

    umbracoInit debug values - help needed

    I have a frontpage, currently at 430 kb'ish. Earlier the size was a whopping 1.5 mb and 4-5 secs initial load, so i've spent quite some time trimming it down for a faster reponse in loadtime.

    I also found that imageGen 2.1 was suffering from the almighty cache bug - got that sorted as well and deleted all the HUGE cache folders. That certainly helped! :-)

    Now the frontpage is loading at around 2 secs on initial load - most times, but if i refresh with CTRL+R and firefox set to not cache any elements, the following refreshes run in at about 0.6-0.9 seconds as i would expect. Chrome also seems to run the initial load very fast, but google webmaster tools insists that the front page load time is around 2-2.3 secs and overall site performance is currently 1.9 secs.

    I wonder why the initial load is so much higher and looked into the debug trace. Can anyone tell me if this is ok?

    Category    Message                  From First(s)                 From Last(s)
    aspx.page    Begin PreInit       
    umbracoInit    handling request    3,8273020733082E-05    0,000038

    The "From first" value is the only figure that exceeds 0,x in my debugtrace.

    Thanks in advance!

  • MartinB 411 posts 512 karma points
    Jan 15, 2011 @ 01:39
    MartinB
    0

    Alright, browsed to another site and then back again with the debug trac and now the umbracoInit was way larger:

    umbracoInit handling request 
    5,11238160157227    E-05 0,000051
  • Markus Johansson 1658 posts 4727 karma points c-trib
    Apr 20, 2012 @ 07:47
    Markus Johansson
    0

    Did you find a solution to this problem?

  • MartinB 411 posts 512 karma points
    Apr 23, 2012 @ 10:24
    MartinB
    0

    Hi Markus

    Not really in the way you would like (i think). My solution was to:

    1. Compress all images used on the site
    2. Use alternate ways to structure body background images (keeping away from transparent .png's).
    3. Update the umbraco install to newst available (4.5.1 back then, i think).
    4. Move to another host (i saw wild spikes in the webmaster tools, but the hostprovider insisted nothing was wrong with their SQL server).

    Moving to a new host made the largest difference and the site is now considered "fast" by Google.

Please Sign in or register to post replies

Write your reply to:

Draft