Site Speed for Magento Site
-
We have our site all ready for test users but the site speed is painfully slow. Our developers are a bit stymied about what to do. Is anyone a site speed expert or know of anyone good that can evaluate our site and tell us what's going wrong?
Thanks!
-
Hi Rachel.
Before you spend money hiring a Magento Expert (the good ones aren't cheap) you can try do the follow:
- Move your site for a Magento optimize server. I use and recommend Simple Helix. (they will even move your site for free).
- Use cloud flare pro as your CDN, they have very nice options that will optimize your website code in the fly. https://www.cloudflare.com/features-optimizer
- Install the GT Metrix Magento Extension. (they have a very nice feature to optimize all the images in your site).
Those steps should be enough to bring your load time to 2-3 seconds, I did myself in many magento sites with speed issues however if after that you still having problem you might need hire a magento expert.
- Felipe
-
Hi Rachel,
I will offer you the same thing as Jeff.
Not that I'm trying to take anything away from what he said in fact it sounds like Jeff knows what he's talking about.
Jeff would you agree with me the amount of CSS calls alone are really the result of a bad coding job?
tzickell@blueprintmarketing.com
However, I've take a look at your server from an outside viewpoint I'd be happy to look at it from the inside.
It sounds like Jeff knows what he's talking about as well.
He also understands magneto which is extremely important
here is a great how to after you get Google Page speed on a Nginx server
http://www.feedthebot.com/pagespeed/
use a RUM speed test
https://www.pingdom.com/signup/
$9 a month
https://www.neustar.biz/enterprise/web-performance
Not cheep but 30 days free use it
All the best,
Thomas
-
Hi Rachel,
I after looking at your server set up believe that using Apache instead of Nginx is not A Wise thing to do if you want to have a faster site considering how much more efficient Nginx is compared to your current set up I believe that you are losing out by not using newer technology is very well known. Nginx delivers better performance and uses 1/8th of the ram your server is therefore not go to be as fast using Apache and Will cost you a great deal more. In addition when if you were to get a large amount of people on your server at the same time that's when ram can make the difference between people connecting or not. It's simply a matter of efficiency and this one was not built the most efficient way
The other thing I'm talking about is simple things like combining your CSS into no more than one or three files.
You're devs should know how to do this it is standard practice if you want a site to have A good load speed.
The other thing that concerns me is using Pingdom to check load speed time is all well and good however they also offer a free base Service that all out you too check your websites be using RUM real user measurement that is what you're people coming to your site Will actually experience. It is a much better method not that I'm putting down using going testing services they should be combined together. Neustar along with Pingdom our great places to start
The text of things that need to be done are simple here A fantastic place to look however because your developers have been working to try to solve this issue I woud want somebody that understands speed to do the work.
In playing Google PageSpeed is nothing new people have been using the service for quite a long time. It will fix what a few of the issues
But do not forget that the larger issues are simple things like your stylesheet and CSS
Look at what you're developers first think is going to be fast 12 external CSS files?
No it will not be fast
http://www.feedthebot.com/pagespeed/combine-external-css.html
External CSS files
Too many CSS files. Solution? combine them into one.
12 external CSS files found:- http://cdn.plasticplace.com/skin/frontend/default/plasticplace/css/mstyle/styles.css
- http://cdn.plasticplace.com/skin/frontend/default/plasticplace/css/mstyle/responsive.css
- http://cdn.plasticplace.com/skin/frontend/default/plasticplace/css/styles.css
- http://cdn.plasticplace.com/skin/frontend/default/plasticplace/css/elastislide.css
- http://cdn.plasticplace.com/skin/frontend/default/plasticplace/css/onepcssgrid.css
- http://cdn.plasticplace.com/skin/frontend/default/plasticplace/css/combined-css.css
- http://cdn.plasticplace.com/skin/frontend/default/plasticplace/css/jquery.reveal.css
- http://cdn.plasticplace.com/skin/frontend/default/plasticplace/css/adjnav.css
- http://cdn.plasticplace.com/skin/frontend/default/default/css/print.css
- - http://cdn.plasticplace.com/skin/frontend/default/plasticplace/css/slider-style.css
- http://cdn.plasticplace.com/skin/frontend/default/plasticplace/css/magebuzz/testimonial.css
Inline CSS
no inline CSS found.**CSS attributes in HTML elements **
example:or
etc.
13 in element CSS foundCSS @ imports
@ import not detected - good171 total links found on this page
130 unique links
120 unique internal links
5 unique external links
23 links not counted (href='#' or 'mailto:' etc.)Of those links..
63 are image linksRequests
CSS files: 12
Too many CSS files.Scripts: 18
You may have too many scripts.Images: 107
iframes: 1
Total Requests: 138
Services
jQueryThe amount of requests is very high. I would recommend switching DNS to DynECT and your content delivery network to edgecast there faster then AWSAnd offered Google page's being in there product with the ability to catch dynamic and staticcontent.They are an excellent choice.I can tell you that finding a way to host that will manage Nginx along with correctly installing Google Page speed then offering the Best tools for the job and have the speed & security for PCI compliance FreHost is the only company I have known that does this. I would point your guys in the direction of Google Page speed which they should be using already & tips fromhttp://www.feedthebot.com/tools/spider/test.phpHowever if you want the job to be done correctly I would take my recommendation and at least contact http://www.gregreindel.com/contact/ he knows this stuff very well.Sincerely,Thomas
-
Rachel -
Our company is a Magento Silver Solutions partner, and we have many Magento Certified Developers on our team.
Magento can be a powerhouse of an eCommerce system (that's probably why it has a 26% marketshare in the Alex 1 million sites that are eCommerce).
But it does require a lot of memory to run properly, and the hosting does need to be fine-tuned.
It does look like you are using a CDN for your site, and in a speed test, the site is loading quickly in 1.98 seconds (see screenshot).
I'd be happy to run our Magento Code Audit tool on the site, if you want to contact me directly: jeff -at- customerparadigm .com, and it will let you know core file modifications, extensions that are running, and server specs. We normally charge for this, but because it's the holidays, I'm happy to do this at no charge
-
I just checked your hosting, and it appears you're using liquid web they are a good hosting company. However, I do not know what level of server you're on do you?
Magento takes an extremely large amount of power to Post it correctly for instance when I host Magento
Websites I stick to a formula 4 cores with 4 Gb of RAM at the minimum and I use a security centric however extremely fast hosting provider http://www.FireHost.com
Because of PCI compliance using FireHost and it's managed Nginx architecture and the company's willingness to help you with this type of issue it is an easy choice for me for Magento sites.
http://builtwith.com/test.plasticplace.com
- Hosting: LiquidWeb host the domain test.plasticplace.com
- **WHOIS: **Click Here
- IP Address: 209.59.143.3
via: http://www.whoishostingthis.com/test.plasticplace.com#ixzz2oJdhuCr1
Let's I will look at your code
!-- Optimized using GTspeed -->
Well GTspeed
Does not really exceed peoples expectations in the review of it shows here.
By using Nginx instead of Apache you will save an incredible amount of memory you can get away with using A fraction of the memory needed to power an Apache based server. The other issue that I don't dislike but should be being used with Nginx or simply replaced by Nginx entirely is varnish it is a Great reverse proxy server however there's no need to use it when an Nginx
Web server can do all the same things much more efficiently I don't think the hosting was a priority in this case .
However I don't know what your server specs are in considering your running
Is very memory hungry Web server on top of not combining your CSS or stylesheets shows me that GT speed is really not a Great tool.
You can get an incredible results by using Google page speed along with Nginx
By implementing Google page speed through a 100% managed hosting environment you will be able to get rid of the issues the way instead of just minimizing them as GT Speed has.
If your developers are not concerned about site speed and this is a mystery to them I honestly would suggest speaking to developer that can fix this easily I can give you a recommendation
You can also reach him via this site it is still under construction however I know the contact the contact form works.
I know that this person can help you as I have worked with in the past and he is a wizard your page to eat considering the size of this site should be under two seconds it is not hard to do and is very essential that it is done correctly with an e-commerce site
Respectflly,
Thomas Zickell
-
I've seen the "waterfalls" before, but our developers say they have done everything to optimize the site speed already. Is there something that they are missing?
-
Hi Thomas,
We are using LiquidWeb for hosting and Amazon for the cdn. Our developers claim that they are doing everything they can.
Additionally, why is the site poorly built? Are you referring to the way it's been set up for site speed?
Thanks,
Rachel
-
Yes I actually believe that the site has been fairly poorly built. No one has really done anything to speed up the site including the basics it seems like you slept the content delivery network on there is a Band-Aid which is an excellent start however if I may ask what type of CDN are using? Meaning what brand
what hosting company are you using?
http://tools.pingdom.com/fpt/#!/dvSZEH/http://test.plasticplace.com
your site is not using compression when it sure is lacking so many things that are described in the links above I will be more than happy to investigate the site a lot more further on my desktop I will reply please look at the problems above and give me the hosting company's name along with the CDN company sincerely Thomas
-
Hi Rachel,
Check out this website http://tools.pingdom.com and enter in your test URL. Your developers will quickly be able to see what is being served up and what files are taking the most time to load. You can do this for any URL in the new site as well if things are running slow. Hope this was helpful.
Patrick
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Redesign Just Starting - Should I Leave The Previous Incomplete Site or Setup A Temporary Holding Page and Redirect Previous URL'S?
Hi All I've picked up a new website project and wanted to ask about the best way to proceed with the current site during the development process. The current site is incomplete although it has been live for a while and has over 80 pages in the sitemap. Link to site https://tinyurl.com/ychwftup The business owner wants to take down the current site and simply add a landing page stating "new website coming soon". From an SEO perspective, am I better to keep the current site live until the new site is ready? Or would it not make any difference if I setup the landing page and add 301 redirects from each page in the sitemap to the landing page. Many Thanks In Advance For Any Assistance
Web Design | | ruislip180 -
Footer links on my site... bad for passing page rank?
i've been told that it is possible that google discounts the weight or page rank passed in footer links of websites and my website has the navigation to many of my pages in the footer of each page. My whole website is about 20 pages so each page has links to the 5 most popular pages at the top and the rest of the links are in the footer of each page. Am i losing page rank by having these links in the footer? Should i make my navigation different? I have lots of articles on my site so i thought it might be not only helpful to my readers but give my pages an seo boost if i placed in context links in the body of my articles to other pages of my site. Does this sound like a good idea? Thanks mozzers! Thanks mozzers!
Web Design | | Ron100 -
Site as one page - SEO implications
We may be inheriting a site and will be asked to do SEO for it. We will have control over the development of the site, so this structure is what it is. My question is - how significant of an impact do you think this is going to have and can you think of any workarounds that may help? Basically, the user experience of the site will feel similar to multiple pages. However, this site will, in essence be one page and pull various content through javascript from different locations. I have not seen the site yet (and believe it is still in development), but this is how it has been explained to me. Any thoughts? My first thought was to add a blog to add page depth to the site and expand the content. Any other thoughts are welcome and appreciated. Thanks. (I know this is limited information, I'm sorry. It's just about all I have to work with right now, and I was a little concerned and was hoping for a second opinion)
Web Design | | AdamWormann0 -
Will a .com and .co.uk site (with exact same content) hurt seo
hello, i am sure this question has been asked before, but while i tried to search i could not find the right answer. my question is i have a .com and .co.uk site. both sites have exact same product, exact same product descriptions, and everything is the same. the reason for 2 sites is that .com site shows all the details for US customers and in $, and .co.uk site shows all the details to UK customers and with Pound signs. the only difference in the 2 sites might be the privacy policy (different for US and UK) and different membership groups the site belongs to (US site belong to a list of US trade groups, UK belongs to a list of UK trade groups). my question is other than the minor difference above, all the content of the site is exactly the same, so will this hurt seo for either one or both the site. Our US site much more popular and indexed already in google for 4 years, while our UK site was just started 1 month ago. (also both the sites are hosted by same hosting company, with one site as main domain and the other site as domain addon (i thought i include this information also, if it makes sense to readers)) i would appreciate a reply to the question above thanks
Web Design | | kannu10 -
Managing international sites
Hi all, I am trying to figure out the best way to manage our international sites. We have two locations, 1 in the UK and 1 in the USA. I currently use GEOIP to identify the location of the browser and redirect them using a cookie to index.php?country=uk or index.php?country=usa. Once the cookie is set I use a 301 redirect to send them to index.php, so that Google doesnt see each url as duplicate content, which Webmaster tools was complaining about. This has been working wonderfully for about a year. It means I have a single php language include file and depending on the browser location I will display $ or £ and change the odd ise to ize, etc. Problem I am starting to notice is that we are starting to rank better and better in the USA search result. I am guessing this is because the crawlers must be based out of the USA. This is great, but my concern is that I am losing rank in the UK, which is currently where most of our business is done out of... So I have done my research and because I have a .net will go for a /uk/ or /us/ sub folder and create two separate webmaster tools site and set them up to target each geographic location. Is this okay? http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=182192#2 HERE IS THE PROBLEM: I don't was to have to run two separate website with two separate sets of copy. Also, I dont want to lose all the rank data on urls like: http://www.mysite.net/great-rank-result.html now becomes http://www.mysite.net/uk/great-rank-result.html. On top of this I will have two pages, the one just mentioned and now adding http://www.mysite.net/us/great-rank-result.html, which I presume would be seen as duplicate copy? (Y/n) Can I use rel canonical to overcome this? How can I don't this without actually running the two pages. Could you actually have 1 site in the root folder and just use the same GEOIP techology to do a smart MOD REWRITE adding either UK or US to the url therefore being able to create two webmaster accounts targeting each geographic location? Any advise is most welcome.
Web Design | | Mediatomcat0 -
Given the lastest Google update, should I rewrite my Flash site or try to present an alternative HTML/CSS site?
I have a site that was created using Flash. The reasoning behind this was, at the time, that I didn't care if the site ranked or not (portfolio site). Now I would like to drive traffic to the site from SE's. Given the Penguin update, should I rewrite my Flash site in HTML/CSS or present an alternative site for bots and browsers that don't support Flash? My concern is that by presenting an alternative site to bots and non Flash supporting browsers that the SE's will see potentially see this as cloaking. Thoughts and advice would be much appreciated.
Web Design | | mj7750 -
Two sites in same industry and which shopping cart
Right. So I suspect I am going to sound paranoid here - but you'll all forgive me right?? I am sure I saw a reply to a question on the Q&A suggesting that it was a bad idea to have two sites in one industry as Google may see it as trying to get two bites of the SERP cherry... is this accurate? I have an existing asp.net site in the maternity wear industry here in Australia and am wanting to start another site to appeal to a different customer base... the market is quite broad. There will be a core list of products that are the same between the sites, but also some quite different products. Content, product descriptions and categorys will be different. I have another website that I bought with reasonable age and links in the industry that I was going to 301 to the new site to give it a kick in the juice. So, not wanting to deceive my customers in anyway, I was thinking I would call it a "division of" or "sister site to" the existing ecommerce site, with a single link back and forward between the two sites. Would there be anything wrong with this in googles eyes? Even with same contact details? They would be run on totally different platforms and hosted by totally different providers. Or would you keep them totally seperate and only have contact details in images? Or a step further and have totally different phone numbers etc? Then the shopping cart - I would love some suggestions on which opensourse cart to use, preferrably one that I can set up myself, and that has a good framework for seo. I want to use schema.org, authorship, seo friendly urls all of which I am having trouble getting out of the developer of my asp.net site.... I don't want the new site to be asp.net Thanks in advance!!
Web Design | | catfree0 -
Mobile Sitemap for Site with Media Queries
I'm doing SEO for a site. It uses Media Queries and the CSS to automatically resize the site for the screen size in use. I.e. the site detects the screen size of say an iPhone and the CSS knows which elements to hide for that screen size and still make it look good. This is great because it will automatically cut down the content to display nicely on small screens - obviating the need for a separate mobile site. What kind of sitemap should be generated since the urls are for desktop and mobile use? Yoast (sweet SEO) said it should have both regular and mobile style sitemap to get both the regular and mobile bots to visit, but didn't elaborate on how that sitemap should look. Do you have a recommendation for how exactly the sitemap should look? Should the sitemap have the urls all twice, i.e. once regular and once with the mobile indicator?
Web Design | | GregoryHaze1