Comments on: Optimizing Freeware Genius blog performance

By: Rarst

Rarst — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 06:27:48 +0000

@sanjeev As I wrote in post it is feature-rich and works nicely.

By: sanjeev

sanjeev — Sun, 17 Jul 2011 17:43:51 +0000

what you think of using w3 cache plugin..will it help alot…for sites

By: Rarst

Rarst — Thu, 17 Feb 2011 16:42:40 +0000

@Charleston Sorry, I have no experience with more recent Super Cache versions. If you don't need/want more complex options then either plugin should do nicely for basic static caching.

By: Charleston

Charleston — Wed, 16 Feb 2011 16:09:17 +0000

Thanks for informative post, Rarst. Is it worth it to switch from super cache to W3 cache? Have tried it but the setup seems too complicate and hv switch back to super cache. Heard there’s not much different. Wp super cache has CDN options too. Just wonder…is it worth it?

By: Suffusion Page Speed Performance | PeterHallam.com.au

Suffusion Page Speed Performance | PeterHallam.com.au — Sun, 22 Aug 2010 23:46:01 +0000

[...] most important issue to correct in order to improve my page load times.After much experimentation, Googling, Yahooing and Asking, I was left with no other option than trail and error.It appears that the Site [...]

By: “Digging Into WordPress” book review | Rarst.net

“Digging Into WordPress” book review | Rarst.net — Fri, 25 Jun 2010 20:46:47 +0000

[...] WordPress materials as well.Samer of FreewareGenius bought me a copy as thank you gift for optimizing his blog’s performance and I found to read it time this week.Topics coveredBook consists of over ten large chapters, which [...]

By: Rarst

Rarst — Thu, 13 May 2010 20:01:54 +0000

@Devon

Yep, external scripts can be real performance killer. Actually W3 can fetch them for you and re-serve with bells and whistles, but that is clearly not native and can easily break things.

Myself I just try to keep amount of external scripts to the minimum. Currently I only use Google AdSense and Analytics at this blog.

By: Devon

Devon — Thu, 13 May 2010 06:38:31 +0000

Only problem is that you can’t do anything when you use toolbars and other external scripts. Just install Meebo Bar, Wibiya or even just some “relevant articles” script. A rank… and then F rank. Terrible :(

By: Rarst

Rarst — Fri, 30 Apr 2010 20:21:12 +0000

@Leaf

For the long-cached content like images it makes no difference.

However for content like CSS that might change it is better to set shorter relative times. Otherwise you might make changes to CSS but some visitors will remain stuck with old version.

Another issue to be careful about is default expires. I managed to screw up considerably once – moved to another hosting, it had different type for JavaScript files and my rules back then ended up prohibiting caching JS completely. I wondered why is it so slow for few weeks. :)

Current set of rules I quoted in post works nicely for me so far and seems to fit taste of diags tools like YSlow.

By: Leaf.

Leaf. — Fri, 30 Apr 2010 08:02:32 +0000

Hi. Thanks for the article.

Wanted to ask about your .htaccess rules, because I know not much about them.

You use a relative “”access plus (time)”" format. Is that more beneficial than a absolute date? I’m running with a different format which is ….

Header set Expires “Fri, 10 Jun 2011 20:00:00 GMT”.

….. though I like the sounds of relativity better, and the ExpiresByType gives added flexibility.