Load Time for Pages With SS Includes

[auerbach]

I'm building a new site using FP 2003 and DWTs. In several sections of the
web I can create either a conventional page, or build a page that relies on
server-side includes. The latter would be more convenient, for updates, etc.
My question, though, is whether there is any significant difference in page
load time between a single HTML page or a page that is generated via several
includes.

Thanks in advance for any info.

 

[Thomas A. Rowe]

Why not use the FP Include Page Component which is a design-time component meaning the content of
the include is inserted/updated when you save the page in FP.

--
==============================================
Thomas A. Rowe (Microsoft MVP - FrontPage)
WEBMASTER Resources(tm)

FrontPage Resources, WebCircle, MS KB Quick Links, etc.
==============================================

 

[Mark Fitzpatrick]

Of course, it depends on the server. Older versions of IIS, for example,
required all SSI pages to end in .asp and be handled by the ASP engine.
Newer versions have the ability to send SSI pages to a seperate SSI engine
that has much better performance. Of course, it still takes a minor hit on
the web server to process the page, at least initially, but most will cache
the resultant page for a while so that not every hit against the page
requires the web server to find and include pages that haven't changed yet.

The FrontPage Include Bot is excellent as a design-time include and avoids
some of the hastle of SSI, but it's limited in the fact that if you update a
pages used by an include bot it typically only updates all the pages that
use the include when a Recalculate Hyperlinks is performed.

Hope this helps,
Mark Fitzpatrick
Microsoft MVP- FrontPage

 

[Murray]

Older versions of IIS, for example, required all SSI pages to end in .asp

and be handled by the ASP engine.

Are you sure about this? I've use *.shtm for a long time successfully.

 

[Mark Fitzpatrick]

In IIS it was first introduced in IIS 5. Some hosts mapped the .shtml and
..shtml extensions to the ASP engine though to avoid having to name
everything as ASP.

Mark Fitzpatrick
Microsoft MVP - FrontPage

 

[auerbach]

Thanks for the info and suggestions.

Alex

In IIS it was first introduced in IIS 5. Some hosts mapped the .shtml and
.shtml extensions to the ASP engine though to avoid having to name
everything as ASP.

Mark Fitzpatrick
Microsoft MVP - FrontPage