|
|
|
|
|
by zamadatix
875 days ago
|
|
If the last decade of web protocol development seems backwards to you after reading one benchmark then why immediately assume it's insane and deserves a warning label instead of asking why your understanding doesn't match your expectations? The benchmark meant to compare how resource efficient the new backend for curl is by using localhost connectivity. By using localhost connectivity any real world network considerations (such as throughput discovery, loss, latency, jitter, or buffering) are sidestepped to allow a direct measurement of how fast the backend alone is. You can't then assume those numbers have a meaningful direct extrapolation to the actual performance of the web because you don't know how the additional things the newer protocols do impact performance once you add a real network. Ingoring that, you still have to consider the notes like "Also, the HTTP/1.1 numbers are a bit unfair since they do run 50 TCP connections against the server." before making claims about HTTP2 being more than half as slow as HTTP1.1. |
|