MyBB Community Forums

All Big Board Owners wants to kill him

They already did

Well, I took a look - and it does look good. I see where you are getting the 99/100 from - pagespeed online gives me better scores than running from the browser and even using my browser install of pagespeed your index scored a very nice 87 out of 100 which is still good.

Looking at the pagesource I was wondering where all the javascript was though. Have you removed it or are you using a combined script?

Just to add to this discussion, FluxBB is a whole lot faster than MyBB. Period.

lucasbytegenius-- I haven't tried fluxBB (I didnt think many used it, I'll have to take a look if you say its faster) << I'm a performance freak

Leefish-- That's a good idea, I should put a link to the pagespeedonline (for those that have a google account)

http://pagespeed.googlelabs.com/#url=htt...bile=false
it shows 99/100 for the forum
(what was the 87/100 from ... you mean I've still got work to do ... my FireFox google-page-speed also gave a 99/100 )
and the yslow score 96 was also from the browser plugin
... can you tell me where this score came from (so I can look into it) << and what it thinks I need to do

Yes the scripts have all been combined and minified (the scripts are also loaded at the very end)
There's also a very important point that not many of the scripts are needed when you're not logged in ...
so I have an offline and online script library (most of that js script is my own custom stuff for the sign in button and other bits anyway)

So google (and lurkers) will see the offline pages without the need for much javascript at all. Even if they do need the script, the page content will load before the js script is needed (additionally jquery and prototype are coming from the google CDN ... but aren't needed for offline mode, I've stuck the jquery in onlinemode because I'll need it later (later releases of myBB will use jquery, so I can dump proto then))

whoops sorry - my bad - I had link protector switched on in my Virus program and its jscript - so their crappy scripting - was impacting the page speed result. 99/100 with virus scanner off

I have done a lot of work on my board to try and speed it up - of course, I run a downloads site (using XThreads as my downloads system) and so its very image intensive and will never be fast - I get a page score of 87 on the portal and around 79 -82 on other pages. I have reached the point where its all the small javascript files that is my #1 problem so that is why I was so interested in what you had done with the javascript.

I also am loading my prototype and jquery from google - its a bit annoying that the prototype is not minified and so I get a hit for that on my pagespeed.

If you're just interested in the javascript offline method, I can PM you the details.

But it is a custom hack (which requires modification of the php files), and will make it harder for you to upgrade in future (I wouldn't recommend doing this unless you are confident in messing around with the PHP files)

I don't use plugins, since the plugins will often require an extra query (that isn't needed), I use a lot of PHP hacks

all of this "
<script type="text/javascript" src="http://community.mybb.com/jscripts/prototype.js?ver=1600"></script>
<script type="text/javascript" src="http://community.mybb.com/jscripts/general.js?ver=1600"></script>
<script type="text/javascript" src="http://community.mybb.com/jscripts/popup_menu.js?ver=1600"></script>
<link type="text/css" rel="stylesheet" href="http://community.mybb.com/cache/themes/theme2/global.css" />
"

Isn't really needed when you are off line (and certainly isn't needed at the start of the HTML).

The biggest tweak that I found. was reducing request by spritng the images. If you have lots of small images, combine them and set them as one css background (trimming the sizes down) ... or one for vertically repeting units, one for horizonally repeating units and one for icons/non repeating units

You can see that there are only a certain number of parallel downloads the browser can do at one time. And that most of the time isn't spent transferring the data, but its spent getting a request to the data (so the size of the images is often no where near as important as the number of the images)

Have a close look at pingdom tools, and look at what the bar colors mean.

The blue bit is relative to the size of the package, and its often insignificant when comparing to the rest (unless you have a high performance server compared to the network connection)

... off to bed now

It's slow for me in Australia.

well if you have a very simple template why wouldnt it be fast

To be quite honest, speed isn't the most improtant thing. So long as your site takes less than 4 seconds to load (the recommended maximum loading time before you'll start to lose visitors), you're fine. I just tested my freshly installed board and got the following results:

Total loading time:1.2 seconds
Total objects:21 (225.4 KB)
External objects:0 
(X)HTML:1 (9.8KB) 
RSS/XML:0 CSS:1 (10KB) 
Scripts:3 (186.4KB) 
Images:16 (19.2KB) 
Plugins:0 
Other:0 
Redirected:0

1.2 seconds is a great time generally anyway. You've saved all of 0.5 seconds and I must now ask, was it really worth it? I don't think it would be you see - especially for an empty forum with no traffic or content. Sure, if you had a large board which was running slow, you'd want to optimise it. For an empty board though, it's not worth the effort.