I’ve been doing some testing of the web pages, and the sizes seem way too large. On a 56k modem, it would take 45 seconds to download (on a T1, 17 seconds). this is the basic skin, a categories page is 170K (5 products) even without any product images.
I hope CS-Cart can take a look at this and try to reduce the sizes of some of these files.
These are the biggest culprits:
QTY SIZE# TYPE URL
1 39009 CSS skins/custom_pm/customer/styles.css
1 38515 SCRIPT classes/scripts/form_scripts.js
1 27247 SCRIPT classes/ajax/JsHttpRequest.js
1 26456 SCRIPT classes/scripts/exceptions.js
Anyone made any changes to reduce this page bloat?
Actually, it just went up to 190K once I turned on the Google Analytics module.
running a test on www.websiteoptimization.com pulls up all kinds of red flags.
What are you talking about, most of that is serverside.
URL would be great
1.3.5 is a little slower for me aslo
i believe by 10 seconds or so
Pick any url on the demo cart by cs-cart.
[url]Instant Demo - CS-Cart Multi-Vendor Demo Try Free for 15 days
This one is 167 KB compressed (198 KB uncompressed). And this is without the12K compressed Google Analtyics code that is pretty much standard on live carts.
You can use the site I linked earlier or Web Developer plugin for Firefox. Some of this is probably stored in the users browser after the initial download, but still, an extremely large page. You can also download the LORI plugin for Firefox to test download speeds.
The style sheet is also about 40K.
For the post above, this is all client side.
you can test your speed at [url]Free Site Report Card Tool & SEO Strategies - SiteReportCard.com
Total Page Size: 176.21 Kb.
Total objects on the site: 45
HTML Page Size: 29.67 Kb.
Images: 146.55 Kb.
Connection Speed Download Time (sec)
14.4K- 112.78
28.8K- 56.39
56K- 29.00
128K ISDN- 12.69
1.44MB T1- 1.17
Oh ok,
I was under the impression, that the .php page would read the css file and present the page with the right font/color etc.
However it downloads the entire css file? and then the page reads from it…
Hmmm, 190KB seems large to me, but you would only download a lot of file ounce yes? like the .css
I ran a quick test using firebug earlier:
Newegg.com
HTTP Requests: 120
HTML: 17k
CSS: 13k
JS: 95k
Images: 364k:
Total: 491k
CS-Cart Demo:
HTTP Requests: 70
HTML: 11k
CSS: 40k
JS: 102k
Images: 52k
Total: 216k
monstergear.co.uk ( my site )
HTTP Requests: 48
HTML: 7k
CSS: 43k
JS: 94k
Images: 42k
Total: 185k
Amazon:
HTTP Requests: 43
HTML: 33k
CSS: 5k
JS: 56k
Images: 114k
Total: 205k
Pricerunner.com:
HTTP Requests: 54
HTML: 40k
CSS: 68k
JS: 78k
Images: 62k
Total: 246k
Apple Store:
HTTP Requests: 108
HTML: 12k
CSS: 138k
JS: 290k
Images: 349k
Total: 788k
I’m can’t see what the problem is. As far as i can tell it doesn’t compare too badly to some popular sites.
Those sites have a brand name that people know about. People will probably wait a bit longer for their pages to load up then they would my site.
There are direct correlations between site speed performance and conversion rates.
[quote]
There are direct correlations between site speed performance and conversion rates.[/quote]
I quite agree.
All the sites above work fine for me, none of them are slow.
For those that are interested in reducing page size, one step I was researching was removing white space from javascript and css. You can remove about 45K doing this.
actually, blank lines hardly reduce any file size.
removing the if then calls for unused features speeds up cs cart a lot
Thats a handy thing to know, but how does a non-coder go about that, and not run into problems later when they start to use a feature.
Please share on the if/then changes.
I also tested in commenting out the calls to dynamically generate categories in include/common/categories.php and just keep my own static list of categories in the tpl. That seemed to make a slight improvement.
I suggest deactivating all the modules that you don’t use.
Ie I only use:
Ads management
Comments and reviews
Listmania
Manufacturers
News and Emails
Send to a friend
SEO
I can guarantee most people here have twice as much activated… but who uses them?