Is the TTFB for different locations and browsers irrelevant if you are self-hosting?
-
Please forgive my ignorance on this subject. I have little to no experience with the technical aspects of setting up and running a server.
Here is the scenario:
We are self-hosted on an Apache server. I have been on the warpath to improve page load speed since the beginning of the year. I have been on this warpath not so much for SEO, but for conversion rate optimization. I recently read the Moz Post "How Website Speed Actually Impacts Search Rankings" and was fascinated by the research regarding TTFB. I forwarded the post to my CEO, who promptly sent me back a contradictory post from Cloudflare on the same topic. Ily Grigorik published a post in Google+ that called Cloudflare's experiment "silly" and said that "TTFB absolutely does matter."
I proceeded to begin gathering information on our site's TTFB using data provided by http://webpagetest.org. I documented TTFB for every location and browser in an effort to show that we needed to improve. When I presented this info to my CEO (I am in-house) and IT Director, that both shook their heads and completely dismissed the data and said it was irrelevant because it was measuring something we couldn't control.
Ignorant as I am, it seems that Ilya Grigorik, Google's own Web Dev Advocate says it absolutely is something that can be controlled, or at least optimized if you know what you are doing.
Can any of you super smart Mozzers help me put the words together to express that TTFB from different locations and for different browsers is something worth paying attention to? Or, perhaps they are right, and it's information I should ignore?
Thanks in advance for any and all suggestions!
Dana
-
Yes, very helpful guys. I appreciate it!
-
Thanks Igal and hopefully you have some info to work with Dana!
-
Many thanks to both Vadim and Igal for such great information and also a really great thread on the subject. I really, really appreciate your answers.!
-
Honestly, I don't know. I don't think TTFB was ever comparatively tested - at least no to the best of my knowledge.
For security, these are some of the resources I can point to.
I understand that this is not the main issue
Still, I wanted to provide some factual context to my previous statements.
http://zeroscience.mk/files/wafreport2013.pdf http://ddos-protection-services-review.toptenreviews.com/ http://tonyonsecurity.com/2012/11/13/protecting-your-website-cloudflare-or-incapsula/
(This last one is interesting since Tony is a COO of Sucuri. Some would call his our competitor. I prefer 'colleague' )
-
security wise it seems both of you guys have stellar options. for me the issue is performance, caching for dynamic sites, CDN performance, and in this case TTFB response. I was not sure with your response do you have faster TTFB to CF?
Thanks
-
Hi Vadim
Thanks.
Yep, I work for Incapsula but no, we are not the said "Mod".As for CF comparison... Generally speaking, we are more business oriented and security focused. I know that our security offering is more comprehensive, especially because both WAFs were comparatively pen-tested on several occasions and we always came out as consistently (and significantly) better option.We also have addition security features - like 2FA support and backdoor shell protection - which CF simply doesn't offer and we do more in way of ddos mitigation, especially against smart application layer attacks which require security capabilities, besides network muscle.
Still, speed wise, I always considered us to be pretty much on the same level. However, until few days ago I never considered TTFB to be such core SEO factor, so maybe we have better performance there...
But again, to be fair, I`m only speculating - mostly based on the CF blog you've shared.
(if TTFB is considered un-important, it might also be under developed...)Might be an interesting thing to test and document.
-
Hi Igal,
Do you work for incapsula, you are mentioned as a Mod on the blog?
I have heard great things about incapsula from others, but in terms of TTFB is it better than cloudflare? If so, how so?
Also any other ways that it excels Cloudflare? any ways its inferior to Cloudflare in your opinion?
Thanks I am really looking for more info, as I had great results with Cloudflares features and offering, wondering if I should give Incapsula a run
Thanks
-
I absolutely agree with Vadim. (+1)
Google is the best source for Google facts. Everything else is just speculation.
And yes, generally speaking, the best answer is to use a CDN....
The reason is simple. CNDs proxy technology, which was designed to minimize "physical" distances between the site's content and browsers, directly influences TTFB.Being an in-house SEO for a CDN company I get a lot of questions about this from our support and clients. I have to admit, until recent Moz post, I wasn't aware of full implications of TTFB and considered it to be one of few page load speed related metrics. (http://moz.com/blog/how-website-speed-actually-impacts-search-ranking)
This post really helped me get a better grasp on things. Interestingly enough, few month ago one of our clients Guest Posted in our blog about speed improvement gained by our free plan. Among other things, he mentioned 70% improvement in TTFB (grade going from F to A)
(http://www.incapsula.com/the-incapsula-blog/item/718-what-incapsula-free-did-for-my-site)At the time I didn't give it much attention. Because, like many others, I was focusing on overall load speeds....
Now I can't help but feel that this was a missed opportunity.
This post could be even better with the added SEO angle...
If anyone here is interested in giving this a try and guest posting about it, I`ll be happy to provide all resources needed on our end. -
Yea this makes sense as others have said that Cloudflare is trying to say that TTFB is not the most important metric, and so they published this study, as it aids their business model.
I would do just that listen to Google dev vs Cloudflare. Also the way I think about it even if their studies are true, where for the overall benefit TTFB would have to increase if you are using some compression, you still need to work and decrease your TTFB either way, that is just intuition. I apologize if I made it seem that TTFB is to be ignored, because Cloudflare state's that quite boldly,
Again some things that affect TTFB:
- Move your website to a faster/better server (If an option)
- Use a CDN or something similar to reduce the load on the server (repeated requests to a server will increase the TTFB)
- Reduce the time the server spends processing the request for information (sent above) and more here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/10938682/how-to-reduce-server-wait-time
-
Thanks Vadim. Yes, this Cloudflare post is exactly the one I was referencing in my question. As I mentioned, Ilya Gregorik posted a rebuttal to their experiment here: post in Google+
It seems to me that if a Google developer says TTFB absolutely does matter that this would take precedence over anything Cloudflare might say.
What do you think?
-
Databases? Optimize any database queries that are slow This should help: http://www.techfounder.net/2011/03/25/database-profiling-and-optimizing-your-database-the-generic-version/
Now before you pass anything over to the IT this issue is a heated one in some cases where you have people saying that TTFB is not might not be the key metric to go after, here is more food for thought:
http://blog.cloudflare.com/ttfb-time-to-first-byte-considered-meaningles
"At CloudFlare we make extensive use of nginx and while investigating TTFB came across a significant difference in TTFB from nginx when compression is or is not used. Gzip compression of web pages greatly reduces the time it takes a web page to download, but the compression itself has a cost. That cost causes TTFB to be greater even though the complete download is quicker."
-
Thanks Vadim. This is helpful. In the first article the author writes:
"The only thing that is controllable is the server you are on." He suggests optimizing the database. What specific & measurable directive might I give to our IT manager that would accomplish this goal?
The second post looks very helpful indeed. I am downloading Microsoft's VRTA right now. It's a bit technically over my head, but I get the concepts. This should be something I can pass on to IT...however, it seems the info could be a bit dated (it repeatedly references IE 7)...Is there anything additional that might be more current?
Thanks again!
-
Hi Dana,
Yes TTFB is something you can control with the type of server you use. And where that server is in relation to your visitors. You cannot control the browsers they use, but hear are some thoughts on possible optimizations:
Server side: http://createdevelop.blog.com/2010/10/12/how-to-reduce-time-to-first-byte/
Location (plus other suggestions): http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/dd188562.aspx
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
-
Same URL-Structure & the same number of URLs indexed on two different websites - can it lead to a Google penalty?
Hey guys. I've got a question about the url structure on two different websites with a similar topic (bith are job search websites). Although we are going to publish different content (texts) on these two websites and they will differ visually, the url structure (except for the domain name) remains exactly the same, as does the number of indexed landingpages on both pages. For example, www.yyy.com/jobs/mobile-developer & www.zzz.com/jobs/mobile-developer. In your opinion, can this lead to a Google penalty? Thanks in advance!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | vde130 -
Keyword before location: Do you notice a big difference in performance?
Frequently in Moz, I see that the keywords that use "KEYWORD LOCATION " have higher volume than "LOCATION KEYWORD." For example, "chinese food Austin" is 201-500, while "Austin chinese food" is 11-50. I'm interested in your experiences targeting one variation of this type of keyword over the other. Are you seeing that using the exact match matters? Even if the order of K+L versus L+K does matter, do you find that near matches, like "chinese food in Austin", work just as well? Concrete examples of performance would be fantastic.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Kevin_P1 -
Rel="self" and what to do with it?
Hey there Mozzers, Another question about a forum issue I encountered. When a forum thread has more than just one page as we all know the best course of action is to use rel="next" rel="prev" or rel="previous" But my forum automatically creates another line in the header called Rel="self" What that does is simple. If i have 3 pages http://www.example.com/article?story=abc1
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Angelos_Savvaidis
http://www.example.com/article?story=abc2
http://www.example.com/article?story=abc3 **instead of this ** On the first page, http://www.example.com/article?story=abc1 On the second page, http://www.example.com/article?story=abc2 On the third page, http://www.example.com/article?story=abc3: it creates this On the first page, http://www.example.com/article?story=abc1 So as you can see it creates a url by adding the ?page=1 and names it rel=self which actually gives back a duplicate page because now instead of just http://www.example.com/article?story=abc1 I also have the same page at http://www.example.com/article?story=abc1?page=1 Do i even need rel="self"? I thought that rel="next" and rel="prev" was enough? Should I change that?0 -
Investigating Google's treatment of different pages on our site - canonicals, addresses, and more.
Hey all - I hesitate to ask this question, but have spent weeks trying to figure it out to no avail. We are a real estate company and many of our building pages do not show up for a given address. I first thought maybe google did not like us, but we show up well for certain keywords 3rd for Houston office space and dallas office space, etc. We have decent DA and inbound links, but for some reason we do not show up for addresses. An example, 44 Wall St or 44 Wall St office space, we are no where to be found. Our title and description should allow us to easily picked up, but after scrolling through 15 pages (with a ton of non relevant results), we do not show up. This happens quite a bit. I have checked we are being crawled by looking at 44 Wall St TheSquareFoot and checking the cause. We have individual listing pages (with the same titles and descriptions) inside the buildings, but use canonical tags to let google know that these are related and want the building pages to be dominant. I have worked though quite a few tests and can not come up with a reason. If we were just page 7 and never moved it would be one thing, but since we do not show up at all, it almost seems like google is punishing us. My hope is there is one thing that we are doing wrong that is easily fixed. I realize in an ideal world we would have shorter URLs and other nits and nats, but this feels like something that would help us go from page 3 to page 1, not prevent us from ranking at all. Any thoughts or helpful comments would be greatly appreciated. http://www.thesquarefoot.com/buildings/ny/new-york/10005/lower-manhattan/44-wall-st/44-wall-street We do show up one page 1 for this building - http://www.thesquarefoot.com/buildings/ny/new-york/10036/midtown/1501-broadway, but is the exception. I have tried investigating any differences, but am quite baffled.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AtticusBerg10 -
Page disappears from search results when Google geographic location is close to offline physical location
If you use Google to search georgefox.edu for "doctor of business administration", the first search result is http://www.georgefox.edu/business/dba/ - I'll refer to this page as the DBA homepage from here on. The second page is http://www.georgefox.edu/offices/sfs/grad/tuition/business/dba/ - I'll refer to this page as the DBA program costs page from here on. Search: https://www.google.com/search?q=doctor+of+business+administration+site%3Ageorgefox.edu This appears to hold true no matter what your geographic location is set to on Google. George Fox University is located in Newberg, Oregon. If you search for "doctor of business administration" with your geographic location set to a location beyond a certain distance away from Newberg, Oregon, the first georgefox.edu result is the DBA homepage. Set your location on Google to Redmond, Oregon
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RCF
Search: https://www.google.com/search?q=doctor+of+business+administration But, if you set your location a little closer to home, the DBA homepage disappears from the top 50 search results on Google. Set your location on Google to Newberg, Oregon
Search: https://www.google.com/search?q=doctor+of+business+administration Now the first georgefox.edu page to appear in the search results is the DBA program costs page. Here are the locations I have tested so far: First georgefox.edu search result is the DBA homepage Redmond, OR Eugene, OR Boise, ID New York, NY Seattle, WA First georgefox.edu search result is the DBA program costs page Newberg, OR Portland, OR Salem, OR Gresham, OR Corvallis, OR It appears that if your location is set to within a certain distance of Newberg, OR, the DBA homepage is being pushed out of the search results for some reason. Can anyone verify these results? Does anyone have any idea why this is happening?0 -
What are recommended best practices for hosting native advertising sponsored content on domains for large publishers?
On top of clear on-page sponsored content copy would you add meta robots to noindex native advertising? Google recently came out against this type of content in GNews, is there a similar directive for the main index?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | hankazarian0 -
.co.uk .com linking brand and template on different domains?
Hi From an SEO point of view what are the current recommendations for linking and using the same template for the same brand on a .com and .co.uk website, so both named the same, using the same template and products but one for Europe and one for the states and Australia.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | askshopper0 -
Shared Hosting Vs VPS Hosting
From an SEO perspective what are the advantages of VPS Hosting VS Shared Hosting for a local website that has less that 200 pages and gets max 2000 hits per month? Is VPS Hosting worth the extra expense for a local Real Estate Website?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bronxpad0