[saidajigumi]

I find the Khan Academy analysis on compression to be missing any consideration of caching. They're seeing a 2.5% hit for compressing individual JS files vs. their existing JS bundles, or a ~16kb increase on a ~646kb baseline. That seems small enough that I'd also want to see modeling of the bandwidth savings from the finer-grained caching of individual files to get a more complete picture. As cited, only new[1] visitors to the site incur the hit stated, but this page is nominally the homepage for logged-in users. So it seems that recurring usage should be common here, but perhaps there's a non-intuitive usage pattern for their site? In any event, recurring visitors may have to redownload far less total bytes due to ongoing site changes given the improved cache locality of an individual JS file approach.

OTOH, the Google App Engine webserver latency issue looks straightforward and is a great reminder to measure and analyze results for ongoing HTTP/2 deployments.

[1] "new" as "cache miss on all JS assets"