Generic Bundling

Jonathan Bond-Caron jbondc at gdesolutions.com
Fri Oct 11 11:15:59 PDT 2013


On Thu Oct 10 02:22 PM, David Bruant wrote:
> Among other benefits [1]:
> "pushed resources are cached individually by the browser and can be reused across many pages"
> => It's not clear this can happen with an asset.zip
> 

Opposite benefit of using assets.zip, only a single cache entry to lookup. 
You should be able to re-use assets.zip across pages. 

Imagine having 20 images that never change in 1 year. The browser will lookup 20 cache entries, why? Use sprites?
A common use case would be bundle resources that rarely change in a single file.

> We can discuss the deployment aspects of HTTP 2 and whether Generic Bundling as proposed can provide benefits before HTTP 2 is fully deployed, but I feel the bottleneck will be the server-side
> engineering to bundle the resources and this work is equivalent for both HTTP 2 and the proposed Generic Bundling.
> So HTTP 2 wins?
> 

It will be useful, I think of it as a win for files that change frequently.  

Another benefit of bundles not solved by HTTP 2: theming.
http://jquery.com/themes/blue.zip
http://jquery.com/themes/red.zip

It would make distribution of themes much simpler. If developers  point to the same 'cached' bundle from a cdn, that's a win for less internet traffic.
 
The pattern could be:
<link rel="loader" type="application/zip" href="http://jquery.com/themes/blue.zip" ref="theme"> 
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="buttons.css" ref="theme">

For backwards compatibility, you would have buttons.css available on your own the server.
 
I think of bundling as better way of distributing applications (www or packaged), not only the performance benefits of pipelining stuff in a single request.



More information about the es-discuss mailing list