7 ms·
If you think that way, you are not objectively weighing the benefits of server side rendering. It _is_ useful and shouldn't be tossed away for the benefits of a
by aigoochamna 3y ago
If you think that way, you are not objectively weighing the benefits of server side rendering. It _is_ useful and shouldn't be tossed away for the benefits of a 6MB javascript blob.
- 8n4vidtmkvmk 3y agoYou can do better than a 6MB blob. You can code split and cache. It's not that bad. Especially if it's an app, not an SEO site.
- aigoochamna 3y agoA 6MB blob is identical to 2MB, 1MB and 3MB blobs.
- erhaetherth 3y agoNot quite. 1. They can potentially be downloaded and parsed in parallel 2. They can be invalidated independently, meaning on your next visit you may only need to re-DL the 1MB blob instead of the whole thing 3. Not every page will need all 3 blobs, you might only need the 2MB blob to load the homepage which means it'll load a little bit quicker. Then you can either load the next blob on the next click, or start downloading it in the background so the next click is nearly instant 4. You can do this not just between pages, but progressively within a single page. Render part of the UI, wait for the 2nd blob, then render the components that need that bit.