[RndTbl] Learning a little about /etc/hosts
Mike Pfaiffer
high.res.mike at gmail.com
Sat Aug 7 17:56:48 CDT 2010
On 10-08-07 05:25 PM, Robert Dyck wrote:
> I tried a little experiment with Windows ME. I first opened the web page
> www.cbc.ca/news without any LMHOSTS file. (Yes, Windows uses caps). It took:
> 5 seconds to load page header, additional 5 seconds to load the bulk of the
> web page, and 9 seconds to load counts of forum comments to links of news
> stories.
>
> I then added LMHOSTS with the links that Mike provided. However, following
> instructions from the example LMHOSTS.SAV file, I ensured one line per URL.
> So I split lines that Mike had combined, added the local IP address to all
> of them. To ensure timing was not do to any cache, I closed IE before each
> test. The test web page is one I often look at, so no difference between the
> first test and later tests. It took:
> 4 seconds to load the page hearder, additional 4 seconds to load the bulk of
> the page, and 8 seconds to load counts of comments.
>
> This is a little difference, but not a lot. Within experimental error? I do
> have an ad blocker, so some of the work is already done.
Some days the gocomics.com site I mentioned can take close to a minute
and a half to load. By blocking some ad sites I observed the time
reduced more than the 20% you observed. It depends on which ad sites are
being accessed and the number. One day before I started blocking ad
sites, I notice they had half a dozen separate pages under the main
page. The usual number of pop-unders as I believe they are called is
around two to three.
Sean does raise an interesting point. Blocking the sites by domain is
inefficient. It would be better to block them by type. It would reduce
the number of accesses to a minimum. If that makes sense...
> Rob Dyck
Later
Mike
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Roundtable mailing list
> Roundtable at muug.mb.ca
> http://www.muug.mb.ca/mailman/listinfo/roundtable
More information about the Roundtable
mailing list