If you can repro locally, an about:net-internals provides a much more complete view of what things look like from the network stack's perspective, and about:tracing provides a lot more details about Chrome's perspective.I'm not sure how much knowledge there is on this list of the Javascript APIs. I guess connectEnd is what we call connect_end (Shockingly), and requestStart is what we call send_start (Our request_start is much earlier). I don't know the cache well enough to know if these timings could reflect cache revalidation or not, but it does sound like a possibility. The normal (non-cached) order is: Create stream, generate auth token, init body (Which, for uploads, may involve opening one or more files, and checking their sizes and modification dates), and then we record send start. Doesn't seem much in there that could account for the delay.To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/net-dev/CAEK7mvqEnHA2vs%2BDaHG2AoRgW3nJZgGr%3DT5XxZDXOcpxmPb7kw%40mail.gmail.com.--On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 1:42 PM, Ben Maurer <ben.m...@gmail.com> wrote:Hey,--At Facebook we've noticed that there are often long gaps between connectEnd and requestStart in resource timing entries for static resource downloads. I've attached a screenshot of an internal tool that visualizes this. in the highlighted request:- fetchStart = connectStart = connectEnd = left hand side of blue box- connectEnd -> requestStart = 164 ms- requestStart -> responseStart = the green box to the right of the blue box- responseStart -> responseEnd = the tiny blue box to the right of the green box- responseEnd -> performance.now() on the first line of the JS file = the yellow boxIt seems really weird to us that there would ever be a gap between connectEnd and requestStart. There are no redirects for these resources and there appears to be a HTTP2 connection that is open and ready for reuse.One hypothesis I have is that these requests might actually not be network requests but might be served from the user's cache. As we saw in the previous discussion about spacer images even on a fast laptop with flash a cached request can easily take 100 ms. Some UMA data was shared with us suggesting that the 90th percentile request time for cached items is often over 100ms.1) Is there any way that we can distinguish cache hit vs miss with resource timing. Ilya suggested that we could once transferSize is included.2) Would cache hits ever see a long duration between connectEnd and requestStart3) The UMA for the 90th percentile of cached requests seems really high. Is this to be expected?-b
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "net-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to net-dev+u...@chromium.org.
To post to this group, send email to net...@chromium.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/net-dev/05956a81-db3c-4b21-b825-9b5a37b55684%40chromium.org.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "net-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to net-dev+u...@chromium.org.
To post to this group, send email to net...@chromium.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/net-dev/CABgOVa%2B7z1ojUs4MuDZUU8xf%3DYhYieazCifWLvqjktE_woyTZQ%40mail.gmail.com.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chromium Loading Performance" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to loading-dev...@chromium.org.
To post to this group, send email to loadi...@chromium.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/loading-dev/CAFswn4mSf8Yan27J5n-SB35_t%3DBE%3DJ2JAV-BZGDNWfpLuQkA%3Dw%40mail.gmail.com.