$0.5 web hosting with support
Cryptocurrencies, DirectAdmin, e-mail, free SSL, domains
   
Namecheap
Your Ad can be there
+ Post New Thread
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Time to first byte.

  1. #1
    Member nesir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    90

    Time to first byte.



    Hi there guys im having a issue with my time to foirst bite on my website speed.

    I have run it through gtmetrix and all items such as images , gzip compression ect ect seems fine. I score over nine in both y slow. At this point im not sure if there anything more i can do i even signed up with cloudflare and directed my dns to them incase it was a shared hosting environment short on resources. My hosting company cannot give me any solid answers other than to move to dedicated hosting.... also my website design only has graphics and scripts of about 1.72mb so its really small with 55 requests which is far below the average yet speed is still a issue. I would like to try dedicated but somehow i get the feeling cloudflare should have resolved this if that was the issue. Any ideas?

  2. #2
    Fli
    Fli is offline
    Administrator Fli's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    2,495


    Is this useful / helpfull? Yes | No
    depends on content management system you are using. For example Wordpress has plugins that can help check other plugins run-time (contribution to the time to first byte).
    1.72MB is large webpage, i would decrease it to like 500 kB at least. You can try disabling all plugins of your site, if it is a CMS and has additional plugins/extensions.
    You can also try to test time to first byte of a page that is empty .html or empty php file, how it will differ. If empty .php file wold have still high TTFB, then something wrong with web server and you should contact hosting provider.

  3. #3
    Member nesir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    90


    Is this useful / helpfull? Yes | No
    No cms this is straight html, with no external scripts except for google services. so it should be quick however if you say 1.72 is large i know i have alot of images on that web page they have been compressed but im looking into webp as this can compress it even further by 50% about from what i currently have. I dont know if that would work. I like your idea on a empty html thats some good thinking i will try that.

+ Post New Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
 Protected by : ZB BLOCK  &  StopForumSpam