Compression - anyone using it?

Get answers here.

Moderators: BBear, theunknownhost, flaguy

Post Reply
User avatar
Arf
Official Test Penquin
Posts: 9103
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2002 12:00 am
Location: IDAHO, USA
Contact:

Compression - anyone using it?

Post by Arf » Wed Aug 10, 2011 10:47 am

I have a client who thinks that mod_deflate.c is the best thing since sliced bread. I'm wondering if anyone else is using it. cPanel servers do appear to be capable of this but it's not turned on on my servers.

http://www.aptivate.org/webguidelines/Compression.html

Thanks in advance.

nigel
Nothing better to do.
Posts: 342
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 12:00 am
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Post by nigel » Thu Aug 11, 2011 11:23 pm

I use http://gtmetrix.com/ to test websites and by enabling GD compression and other compression, sites become a lot faster to load. There are lot's of things you can do to help with getting your site to load quicker.

I've got a highly modified Joomla and WHMCS site integrated into one and having problems with scripts being compressed in the wrong order which is breaking the site. Something I have spent a lot of time on.

The reason I do it is because I want my hosting site to appear as quickly as possible. It's not a good indicator of a web host speed judging by their website but some of the punters may notice it especially if one web host takes forever for their site to load.

jtmneal07
Propeller head licensee
Posts: 63
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 7:17 pm

Post by jtmneal07 » Fri Aug 12, 2011 7:21 pm

mod_deflate will lower your bandwidth consumption at the cost of more CPU cycles.

Will it make your website load faster? This is impossible to know.

It will make the size of your website being sent to a browser smaller, so in theory this would increase the speed. But if your CPU is having trouble keeping up with these hits and requests, you'll have a longer wait time waiting for your server's CPU to handle your request.

Generally, I don't use mod_deflate. Our servers don't go over their allotted bandwidth limit, or get anywhere close, so I figure it's better to keep CPU cycles free.

User avatar
khimaira2
Nothing better to do.
Posts: 202
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2004 12:19 pm
Location: Location: Location:

Post by khimaira2 » Thu Aug 25, 2011 12:21 am

Maybe this recently announced vulnerability will help you decide:

http://web.archiveorange.com/archive/v/ ... uv2lETRSfD
Outside the box member

User avatar
Arf
Official Test Penquin
Posts: 9103
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2002 12:00 am
Location: IDAHO, USA
Contact:

Post by Arf » Thu Aug 25, 2011 1:06 pm

Awesome, thank you.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest