Webmaster Tools Site performance
EnviroChem
Webmaster Tools' Site Performance tool is very closely related to Page
Speed and they are kind of integral to each other.
Over the past couple of weeks I've been working like crazy to speed up
my sites, however, I've run into a slight snag in the process.
Webmaster Tools' Site Performance tool hasn't updated its stats since
Dec 22nd, even though it was updating almost daily prior to that
date. The thing is that I made major changes on that date and I
really want to know if they did any good and if so, how much things
improved.
Does anyone know what is up with the Site Performance stats and why
they aren't updating?
Sam Kerner
<k...@environmentalchemistry.com> wrote:
> I realize this group is more about the Page Speed add-on, but
> Webmaster Tools' Site Performance tool is very closely related to Page
> Speed and they are kind of integral to each other.
>
> Over the past couple of weeks I've been working like crazy to speed up
> my sites, however, I've run into a slight snag in the process.
> Webmaster Tools' Site Performance tool hasn't updated its stats since
> Dec 22nd, even though it was updating almost daily prior to that
> date. The thing is that I made major changes on that date and I
> really want to know if they did any good and if so, how much things
> improved.
One benefit of the Firefox add-on is that you can analyze your
site instantly. Today, the scoring done by webmaster tools is a
subset of the scoring done by the Firefox add-on, but we are working
to make them do the same tests.
Sam
> Does anyone know what is up with the Site Performance stats and why
> they aren't updating?
>
> --
>
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "page-speed-discuss" group.
> To post to this group, send email to page-spee...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to page-speed-disc...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/page-speed-discuss?hl=en.
>
>
>
Thomas Hey'l
FYI: With last midnight's update of WMT in central europe the problem
was solved at least for my major site, to be precise: two problems.
First, there was an update at the WMT dated 24th of December. Next,
from about 14th until yesterday, the WMT told me my pages would load
slower than approximately 95 % of all other judged sites with an
average loading time of max. 12.1 seconds (whilst this was stable at
1, 1.1 or 1.2 seconds for months before).
With the last update, the rating is "faster than 96 % of other sites"
with an average loading time of 0.5 seconds. On the graph, this looks
like a rock in a plain desert - specially the right side (from last
11.x seconds to 0.5 in free fall and a perfectly vertical line).
Happy New Year, Thomas
Peter Joza
For the firefox plugin, I have a green check for every category, with
nothing major even recommend.
Yet as of the Dec. 29th update to WMT, my site slowed down to 4.8
seconds (72% slower). I haven't even seen an improvement in WMT since
I started updating everything about 2 weeks ago.
Also it still recomends to enable GZIP for pages to speed them up,
even though I enabled it two weeks ago and the FF plugin on the same
page doesn't report any issues with GZIP.
Is it because I have around 15k pages being crawled / accessed /
index? It will take a few more weeks to update?
Thanks,
-Peter
EnviroChem
this evening it was up to Dec 25th and now it is showing Dec 26th.
I am making regular use of the Page Speed and Firebug add-ons to pin
point problems but they are no good for testing the loading speed of
my pages as they nearly grind Firefox to a halt on my computer. I've
been using Opera to test the loading speed of pages as its Developer
tools don't slow it down noticeably. The thing is my I'm on a 15
megabit/sec Internet connection so I really can't gauge how long it
takes my pages to load for the average user. Also I like the fact
that WMT Site Performance tool gives me a relative bench mark
comparison to other sites.
On WMT my site is showing that it is slower than around 85% of sites,
which kills me because I've stripped out almost everything a can and
when I load my pages then go to other sites it consistently loads as
fast or faster than other sites. I really have to wonder if I my stats
are skewed by an international demographic on slower Internet
connections than the typical website.
Peter Joza
reports?
On Dec 30, 6:11 pm, "Thomas Hey'l" <i...@themt.de> wrote:
Thomas Hey'l
to my mind: Tools like these are pretty good to point you to same
flaws and weaknesses. If you have enough friends around the world, ask
them for their impression. If it is good, it is good. And for the
rest, monitor the WMT or Firebug AddOn results, but do it with
knowledge. I.e., it's a very bad idea to compress a style sheet with
only some bytes, since packing and unpacking it takes more time than
loading the uncompressed file.
You should also be careful with the compressed versions of JavaScript
files Page Speed creates. They throw conditional compilation
statements for IE into the waste basket and at least my JS would no
longer be useful that way.
Regards and happy New Year - Thomas
sreeram
> Also what is more important? What the FF plugin sees, or what WMT
> reports?
I'd say both are important.
The firefox plugin gives you qualitative suggestions, which are
actionable (such as "enable gzip"). Although it's not easy to quantify
the effects of adopting these suggestions, there's no doubt that they
make your pages faster overall.
The WMT's page speed report is a much smaller subset of what the
firefox plugin shows, and as you and EnviroChem have noticed, it can
sometimes lag behind. If you have just made your pages faster, it may
take a while for our bots to catch up and for the changes to be
reflected in WMT. However, it's a good introduction for somebody who
hasn't run page speed before (for example, if they don't have ready
access to firefox for whatever reason).
WMT's page load times are a nice quantitative metric, but they can
sometimes be skewed (especially if there's not enough data coming in
from toolbar-enabled users). We've tried to make them less opaque by
showing some example pages and their load times. More transparency has
been requested often (such as an indicator of how reliable the
estimates are and breakdown by country); we're working on them.
Sam Kerner
<k...@environmentalchemistry.com> wrote:
> I'm seeing a slow catch up in my WMT Site Performance stats. Earlier
> this evening it was up to Dec 25th and now it is showing Dec 26th.
>
> I am making regular use of the Page Speed and Firebug add-ons to pin
> point problems but they are no good for testing the loading speed of
> my pages as they nearly grind Firefox to a halt on my computer.
Page Speed should not slow down page loading if you uncheck
"Profile Deferrable Javascript (slow)" from the menu in the page speed
tab. AJAYey sites sometimes become slow because of Firebug's net
panel logging each XmlHttpRequest.
> I've
> been using Opera to test the loading speed of pages as its Developer
> tools don't slow it down noticeably. The thing is my I'm on a 15
> megabit/sec Internet connection so I really can't gauge how long it
> takes my pages to load for the average user. Also I like the fact
> that WMT Site Performance tool gives me a relative bench mark
> comparison to other sites.
>
> On WMT my site is showing that it is slower than around 85% of sites,
> which kills me because I've stripped out almost everything a can and
> when I load my pages then go to other sites it consistently loads as
> fast or faster than other sites. I really have to wonder if I my stats
> are skewed by an international demographic on slower Internet
> connections than the typical website.
>