zydronium/manage.get.gov
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/cisagov/manage.get.gov.git synced 2025-07-23 19:20:47 +02:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity

fixed hyperlinks

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
CocoByte 2024-02-28 20:16:13 -07:00
parent 2721386d21
commit 4358d39cb0
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG key ID: BBFAA2526384C97F
1 changed files with 1 additions and 1 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

2
docs/architecture/decisions/0025-caching.md
View file

@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ We decided on Option 2 - leave things as-is (for now).
Preliminary analysis suggest that implementing caching on static pages will result in negligible improvements to our application load time. A quick look at Kibana logs suggests most of these resources take less than 10ms to load...
![Kibana RTR Logs](../doc-images/caching-rtr-logs.png)
If we look at average load times in Kibana (here is ![the Kibana page with preloaded query](https://logs.fr.cloud.gov/app/visualize#/create?_a=(filters:!(('$state':(store:appState),meta:(alias:!n,disabled:!f,index:'logs-app*',key:'@cf.app',negate:!f,params:(query:getgov-stable),type:phrase),query:(match_phrase:('@cf.app':getgov-stable)))),linked:!f,query:(language:lucene,query:''),uiState:(),vis:(aggs:!((enabled:!t,id:'1',params:(customLabel:'Average%20Response%20Time%20in%20ms',field:rtr.response_time_ms),schema:metric,type:avg),(enabled:!t,id:'2',params:(drop_partials:!f,extended_bounds:(),field:'@timestamp',interval:d,min_doc_count:1,scaleMetricValues:!f,timeRange:(from:now-20d,to:now),useNormalizedEsInterval:!t),schema:segment,type:date_histogram)),params:(addLegend:!t,addTimeMarker:!f,addTooltip:!t,categoryAxes:!((id:CategoryAxis-1,labels:(filter:!t,show:!t,truncate:100),position:bottom,scale:(type:linear),show:!t,style:(),title:(),type:category)),grid:(categoryLines:!f),labels:(show:!f),legendPosition:right,seriesParams:!((data:(id:'1',label:'Average%20Response%20Time%20in%20ms'),drawLinesBetweenPoints:!t,lineWidth:2,mode:stacked,show:!t,showCircles:!t,type:histogram,valueAxis:ValueAxis-1)),thresholdLine:(color:%23E7664C,show:!f,style:full,value:10,width:1),times:!(),type:histogram,valueAxes:!((id:ValueAxis-1,labels:(filter:!f,rotate:0,show:!t,truncate:100),name:LeftAxis-1,position:left,scale:(mode:normal,type:linear),show:!t,style:(),title:(text:'Average%20Response%20Time%20in%20ms'),type:value))),title:'',type:histogram))&_g=(filters:!(),refreshInterval:(pause:!t,value:0),time:(from:now-2w,to:now))&indexPattern=logs-app*&type=histogram)), it looks like we are doing great for load times in stable (using the rtr.response_time_ms metric), staying under 200ms (in the last 4 weeks) and usually hovering around 40-80ms. Some google searching suggests that "an ideal page load time is between 0-2 seconds, but 3 seconds is also considered to be an acceptable score. Anything above 3 seconds increases the likelihood of visitors leaving your site." (Quote shamelessly copied from Sematex)
If we look at average load times in Kibana (here is [the Kibana page with preloaded query](https://logs.fr.cloud.gov/app/visualize#/create?_a=(filters:!(('$state':(store:appState),meta:(alias:!n,disabled:!f,index:'logs-app*',key:'@cf.app',negate:!f,params:(query:getgov-stable),type:phrase),query:(match_phrase:('@cf.app':getgov-stable)))),linked:!f,query:(language:lucene,query:''),uiState:(),vis:(aggs:!((enabled:!t,id:'1',params:(customLabel:'Average%20Response%20Time%20in%20ms',field:rtr.response_time_ms),schema:metric,type:avg),(enabled:!t,id:'2',params:(drop_partials:!f,extended_bounds:(),field:'@timestamp',interval:d,min_doc_count:1,scaleMetricValues:!f,timeRange:(from:now-20d,to:now),useNormalizedEsInterval:!t),schema:segment,type:date_histogram)),params:(addLegend:!t,addTimeMarker:!f,addTooltip:!t,categoryAxes:!((id:CategoryAxis-1,labels:(filter:!t,show:!t,truncate:100),position:bottom,scale:(type:linear),show:!t,style:(),title:(),type:category)),grid:(categoryLines:!f),labels:(show:!f),legendPosition:right,seriesParams:!((data:(id:'1',label:'Average%20Response%20Time%20in%20ms'),drawLinesBetweenPoints:!t,lineWidth:2,mode:stacked,show:!t,showCircles:!t,type:histogram,valueAxis:ValueAxis-1)),thresholdLine:(color:%23E7664C,show:!f,style:full,value:10,width:1),times:!(),type:histogram,valueAxes:!((id:ValueAxis-1,labels:(filter:!f,rotate:0,show:!t,truncate:100),name:LeftAxis-1,position:left,scale:(mode:normal,type:linear),show:!t,style:(),title:(text:'Average%20Response%20Time%20in%20ms'),type:value))),title:'',type:histogram))&_g=(filters:!(),refreshInterval:(pause:!t,value:0),time:(from:now-2w,to:now))&indexPattern=logs-app*&type=histogram)), it looks like we are doing great for load times in stable (using the rtr.response_time_ms metric), staying under 200ms (in the last 4 weeks) and usually hovering around 40-80ms. Some google searching suggests that "an ideal page load time is between 0-2 seconds, but 3 seconds is also considered to be an acceptable score. Anything above 3 seconds increases the likelihood of visitors leaving your site." (Quote shamelessly copied from Sematex)
![Kibana Average Load Times Graph](../doc-images/caching-average-load-times.png)
NOTE: While we considered implementing caching in a sandbox (See footnote) in order to examine risks and benefits of OPTION 1 in more detail, this incurred more overhead than expected (mainly due to poor documentation). Therefore, we decided it was not worth the investment.