Hinweis
Für den Zugriff auf diese Seite ist eine Autorisierung erforderlich. Sie können versuchen, sich anzumelden oder das Verzeichnis zu wechseln.
Für den Zugriff auf diese Seite ist eine Autorisierung erforderlich. Sie können versuchen, das Verzeichnis zu wechseln.
| Quick Resource Box |
In the article Eric Lawrence, the author and the creator of the Fiddler tool, shares simple technique of adding custom rules that color outstanding request – be it improper caching or large payload. Adding Custom Rules To FiddlerI am using Fiddler v. 2.2.8.6. To add customer rules follow these steps:
static function OnBeforeResponse(oSession: Session)
// Flag files over 25KB if (oSession.responseBodyBytes.length > 25000) { oSession["ui-color"] = "red"; oSession["ui-bold"] = "true"; oSession["ui-customcolumn"] = "Large file"; } // Mark files which do not have caching information if (!oSession.oResponse.headers.Exists("Expires") && !oSession.oResponse.headers.Exists("Cache-Control")) { oSession["ui-color"] = "purple"; oSession["ui-bold"] = "true"; oSession["ui-customcolumn"] = "Review Caching"; }
Testing Fiddler Custom RulesTo test the Fiddler custom rules just navigate to the site you want to inspect. Here is what I get after navigating the home page of my blog: Highlighting potential performance problems helps quickly focus on it and start improving. Notice the request #3 colored in red – it exceeds 25 KB limit. Request #8 does not have caching header defined for it – colored in purple. Notice also the comments in Custom column. I could go further and and fine tune it, for example filter out 404, etc. Conclusion and RecommendationsRecent announcement from Google that it incorporates performance into ranking algorithm makes the performance a serious competitive advantage. I can easily imagine new breed Google performance consultants stealing a pie from SEO consultants. I guess it’d be a good move for any SEO consultant to get perf under their belt. Using Fiddler makes it really easy. Related BooksRelated Posts |
Comments
- Anonymous
April 11, 2010
Very nice idea!I could imagine extending it to include a number of perf-related guidelines, such as headers that aren't required (like "Server"), use of ETag, etc. - Anonymous
April 11, 2010
Rick, thank you! All the credits go to Eric of course. :)Yes, it's sounds like great idea - creating a set of rules for common perf issue. I'd streamline perf inspection of web sites, making it real fun :)