Use of gzip compression?
Moderator: General Moderators
- seodevhead
- Forum Regular
- Posts: 705
- Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 8:18 pm
- Location: Windermere, FL
Use of gzip compression?
I have read a couple things on using gzip compression in php and was wondering if there were any disadvantages to using this would be? It seems like a great thing that could really speed up downloads and also lessen bandwidth, but is it too good to be true? Thanks for any advice and opinions.
- AKA Panama Jack
- Forum Regular
- Posts: 878
- Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2005 4:21 pm
We are using it on our servers and it cuts down the bandwidth usage by a HUGE margine. This helps both you and the person browsing your site. They don't have to wait as long for a page to load, especially if they are on a dialup connection.
Check this site out... http://web-sniffer.net/
You can use them to check out many different web sites to see if they have gzip enabled. If a site does it will list the compressed and uncompressed size of the html that was sent.
Check out our AATraders site. Click Here
Content (encoded: 18.79 KiB / decoded: 109.32 KiB)
You will see the gzipped page is 18k and if we turned off gzip the page would have been 109k. That's a HUGE difference in size and speed.
Check out a commercial site like CNN site. Click Here
Similar results... Content (encoded: 18.69 KiB / decoded: 98.47 KiB)
The only downside is that it will take a little extra processing power to compress the data but that is offset by the reduced processing power needed to send the smaller page.
I wish every site used gzip because it would make things so much faster.
Check this site out... http://web-sniffer.net/
You can use them to check out many different web sites to see if they have gzip enabled. If a site does it will list the compressed and uncompressed size of the html that was sent.
Check out our AATraders site. Click Here
Content (encoded: 18.79 KiB / decoded: 109.32 KiB)
You will see the gzipped page is 18k and if we turned off gzip the page would have been 109k. That's a HUGE difference in size and speed.
Check out a commercial site like CNN site. Click Here
Similar results... Content (encoded: 18.69 KiB / decoded: 98.47 KiB)
The only downside is that it will take a little extra processing power to compress the data but that is offset by the reduced processing power needed to send the smaller page.
I wish every site used gzip because it would make things so much faster.
- Maugrim_The_Reaper
- DevNet Master
- Posts: 2704
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 5:43 am
- Location: Ireland
Just to note several Windows firewall/anti-virus packages (cough...Norton...cough) may alter your browser's outgoing headers. The result is that if you force gzip (i.e. don't check the browsers acceptance of gzip content) pages may display as garbage (basically the ASCII representation of the gzip's content). Came across this on an afore mentioned website using Norton 2004 about a year or more ago (I don't use Norton anymore so not sure if fixed in any way).
Other than the small quibble, gzip is worth exploring and supporting.
Other than the small quibble, gzip is worth exploring and supporting.
- AKA Panama Jack
- Forum Regular
- Posts: 878
- Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2005 4:21 pm
Well Nortons's Firewall is about the worst firewall I have ever run across. I generally love Norton products and use them but their Firewall (Internet Security) package is a total pile of doggie poop. I would only recommend it to someone I hated and didn't want browsing the internet. None of the rest of Nortons software will touch your outgoing header information, not even Nortons Antivirus. It's just their IS Firewall that is total garbage.Maugrim_The_Reaper wrote:Just to note several Windows firewall/anti-virus packages (cough...Norton...cough) may alter your browser's outgoing headers. The result is that if you force gzip (i.e. don't check the browsers acceptance of gzip content) pages may display as garbage (basically the ASCII representation of the gzip's content). Came across this on an afore mentioned website using Norton 2004 about a year or more ago (I don't use Norton anymore so not sure if fixed in any way).
Other than the small quibble, gzip is worth exploring and supporting.
Most DECENT firewalls will not alter your headers.
And Maugrim is right you should always check to see if the browser supports gzip befor using it. Such as...
Code: Select all
if(strstr($_SERVER["HTTP_ACCEPT_ENCODING"],"gzip"))
{
// ok, gzip encode everything
}Is there a way to test against this situation?AKA Panama Jack wrote:Some people may tell you not to use gzip because of problems with IE. There is a BUG in IE they have never fixed. If you try to view a gziped web site through a proxy you will see garbage because IE cannot decode gzipped data when sent through many proxies. As long as you do not use IE through a proxy it will view gzipped pages just fine.
- Ambush Commander
- DevNet Master
- Posts: 3698
- Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:29 pm
- Location: New Jersey, US
- AKA Panama Jack
- Forum Regular
- Posts: 878
- Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2005 4:21 pm
Well unfortunately, due to Microsoft bundling IE with Windows, most people don't know there's an option.AKA Panama Jack wrote:Not that I know of. That's why some sites have gzip turned off. Personally, IE users can go suck lemons if they are behind a proxy for all I care.They should be using a better browser.
EDIT: But now that I think about it, generally if something is behind a proxy, it has a network administrator or two and if so, that means they will likely be aware of this problem. I believe the benefits of gzip outweight the small margin of people in IE behind proxy