News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on The Effect of Network and Infrastructural Variables on SPDY’s Performance (2014).

Re:The Effect of Network and Infrastructural Variables on SP... by ck2 on Tuesday September 22, 2015 @06:51AM (#10257767)
https://docs.google.com/gview?url=http://arxiv.org/pdf/1401....

So would the same apply for HTTP/2.0 since they are so similar?

     In summary, we deduce that SPDY loses its performance gains as a
     website is sharded more. However, these negative results are not ubiquitous
     and vary remarkably depending on the number of page resources. This
     raises a few questions about SPDY deployment. Are the benefits enough for
     designers and admins to restructure their websites to reduce sharding? What
     about third party resources that cannot be consolidated, e.g. ads and social
     media widgets? Can SPDY be redesigned to multiplex across domains? Is
     proxy deployment [29] rewarding and feasible as a temporary solution? The
     success of SPDY (and thereupon HTTP/2.0) is likely to be dependent on
     the answers to precisely these questions.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Effect of Network and Infrastructural Variables on SP... by acdha on Tuesday September 22, 2015 @10:05AM (#10258613)
That would apply but it's somewhat odd to see the tone of surprise for something which has been widely mentioned as an optimization-turned-antipattern for SPDY or HTTP/2 since at least 2012 or so. I believe at least Chrome has also optimized so addresses which share the same IP (or SSL cert?) will be collapsed into the same existing connection rather than opening new ones.

Opening all of those connections is also something of an anti-pattern even for HTTPS depending on how much data you're exchanging relative to the SSL handshake cost – see e.g.:

https://insouciant.org/tech/network-congestion-and-web-brows...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Effect of Network and Infrastructural Variables on SP... by chetanahuja on Tuesday September 22, 2015 @01:22PM (#10260096)
The tone of surprise (in the paper as well as this thread) might have something to do with how the whole HTTP/2 stack has been sold as an unmitigated "good" for all and sundry. The paper also mentions how the SPDY whitepaper http://www.chromium.org/spdy/spdy-whitepaper presents exactly the opposite results in presence of packet-loss. The language in the paper falls short of an outright accusation but there's an implication that the promises of the new protocols have been oversold by the backers (mostly Google).
[ Parent | on HN ]