This blog is the final installment in a 5-part series on APMdigest where I discuss web application performance and how new protocols like SPDY, HTTP/2, and QUIC will hopefully improve it so we can have happy website users.
It has been almost a year since HTTP/2 has been a ratified standard. I talked about how widely support it is - only 4% of the top 2 million Alexa sites truly support it.
Does your website support it? What about your web host provider?
One place to check is the Google Chrome browser itself by going to Chrome Web Tools.
By now, most web browsers support the new version of HTTP. The top five, Chrome, Firefox, IE/Edge, Opera and Safari all support HTTP/2, at least partially. The top two widely used web servers, Apache and Nginx, support it as well.
Previously, I mentioned a number of workarounds that developers used to make their websites faster with HTTP/1.1. Now with HTTP/2, some of these workarounds can actually degrade performance with HTTP/2 implementation.
With only one connection per host that is allowed with HTTP/2, domain sharding can hurt a developer's attempt to improve performance. So if there was used previously, an upgrade to HTTP/2 means that the domains must be unsharded.
However, care must be taken with this. Doing this must be tested on a case-by-case basis. Some large files are able to compress better than smaller files. So it may not be to your advantage to uncombine the files if you have a lot of smaller files.
Inlining scripts directly into the HTML was another way to reduce the number of connections and round-trips to the server. With HTTP/2, this is no longer needed with only one TCP connection.
HTTP/2 Pros & Cons
There are number of advantages of using HTTP/2, including:
■ Substantially and measurably improve end-user perceived latency over HTTP/1.1 using TCP
■ Address the head of line blocking problem in HTTP
■ Not require multiple connections to a server to enable parallelism, thus improving its use of TCP
■ Retain the semantics of HTTP/1.1, like header fields, status codes, etc.
■ Clearly define how HTTP/2.0 interacts with HTTP/1.x via new Upgrade header field
But, despite these advantages, there are still some disadvantages that the new protocol version has not addressed.
Some disadvantages are:
■ Unable to get around TCP head of line blocking, particularly during packet loss
■ TCP's congestion avoidance algorithm increases serialization delay
■ TLS connection setup still takes time
■ Binary format (for people like me) makes troubleshooting a bit more difficult, not being able to see plaintext, without TLS encryption keys
We Need to Be QUIC
So we see that we still have a number of limitations even with HTTP/2. Although, I have to admit, the last one is somewhat selfish.
One big limitation is the TCP protocol. Due to its connection-oriented nature, there's no getting around the head of line blocking and the time it takes to open and close the connection.
Google wanted a way around this, and in 2012 set out to develop a protocol that runs on top of UDP, which is connectionless protocol. The protocol is called Quick UDP Internet Connections, or QUIC. Another clever name by Google?
Clever or not, Google needed a protocol with quicker connection setup time and quicker retransmissions. Unlike TCP, UDP would allow for this. They wanted to take some of the benefits of the work done with SPDY, that ultimately went into the HTTP/2 standard, such as multiplexed HTTP communication, but running over UDP rather than TCP.
The main goal? To reduce overall latency across the Internet for a user's interactions.
QUIC implements various TCP features, but without the limitations, such as the round-trip time for connection setup, flow control, and congestion avoidance. With UDP's connectionless orientation, RTT is zero since UDP just starts sending data when it needs to rather than talking to the other side to ensure it's available to talk.
Where is QUIC?
The most common place I've come across QUIC being used is on YouTube.
Have you ever compared the speed of a YouTube video compared to some of the other providers like Wistia and Vimeo? Where I live, I'll be lucky to get 3Mbps from my ISP. Watching a video on YouTube rarely buffers. I can almost always count on buffering when watching a video hosted on Wistia or Vimeo. As you can see in the screenshot below, the protocol being used on YouTube is a mix of QUIC and SPDY.
Contrast that to the screenshot I took from Wistia's site, below.
They are still largely using HTTP/1.1. They're not even on HTTP/2 yet. I'm sure they are doing a number of other things to make their web properties faster, but that explains to me why I rarely get any buffering on YouTube compared to Wistia.
If the speed with which SPDY was tested and went into the HTTP/2 standard, which took about three years from SPDY draft release to HTTP/2 draft release, is it possible that we could have a replacement for the TCP protocol on the web in the next couple of years? This should be interesting and exciting!
Jean Tunis is Senior Consultant and Founder of RootPerformance.
APMdigest invited industry experts to predict how Cloud will evolve and impact application performance and business in 2019. Part 3, the final installment, covers monitoring and managing application performance in the Cloud ...
APMdigest invited industry experts to predict how Cloud will evolve and impact application performance and business in 2019. Part 2 covers multi-cloud, hybrid cloud, serverless and more ...
As a continuation of the list of 2019 predictions, APMdigest invited industry experts to predict how Cloud will evolve and impact application performance and business in 2019 ...
APMdigest invited industry experts to predict how Network Performance Management (NPM) and related technologies will evolve and impact business in 2019 ...
I would like to highlight some of the predictions made at the start of 2018, and how those have panned out, or not actually occurred. I will review some of the predictions and trends from APMdigest's 2018 APM Predictions. Here is Part 2 ...
I would like to highlight some of the predictions made at the start of 2018, and how those have panned out, or not actually occurred. I will review some of the predictions and trends from APMdigest's 2018 APM Predictions ...
I sat down with Stephen Elliot, VP of Management Software and DevOps at IDC, to discuss where the market is headed, how legacy vendors will need to adapt, and how customers can get ahead of these trends to gain a competitive advantage. Part 2 of the interview ...
Monitoring and observability requirements are continuing to adapt to the rapid advances in public cloud, containers, serverless, microservices, and DevOps and CI/CD practices. As new technology and development processes become mainstream, enterprise adoption begins to increase, bringing its own set of security, scalability, and manageability needs. I sat down with Stephen Elliot, VP of Management Software and DevOps at IDC, to discuss where the market is headed, how legacy vendors will need to adapt, and how customers can get ahead of these trends to gain a competitive advantage ...
APMdigest invited industry experts to predict how APM and related technologies will evolve and impact business in 2019. Part 6 covers the Internet of Things (IoT) ...
APMdigest invited industry experts to predict how APM and related technologies will evolve and impact business in 2019. Part 5 covers the evolution of ITOA and its impact on the IT team ...