This topic contains 1 reply, has 2 voices, and was last updated by  Haris 1 year, 4 months ago.

  • Author
  • Participant
    Member since: 15.09.2017
    Number of posts: 5


    We are running into performance issues related to the considerable size of the initial load of ESignlive on devices with a weak cellular signal. I did some investigating and found that the typical first load (before cache) is about 4.1MB. I tested this against both and In cases where we have no cache and a weak cell signal this results in load times approaching a minute or more! But I think there are some simple things that could be done to help with this and I wanted to make this post to see what you think.

    Use Minified JS and CSS Files
    In looking at what items are being downloaded at load I noticed you are using the full versions of many standard/common libraries. I believe you would be able to significantly reduce the network load of your application by swapping these out for the minified versions. Just as an example, I picked a few of the ones I found which are not minified:

    additional-methods.js – 42KB
    additional-methods.min.js – 19KB
    i18next.js – 65KB
    i18next.min.js – 34KB
    jquery.validate.js – 48KB
    jquery.validate.min.js – 23KB
    jquery-ui.js – 509KB
    jquery-ui.min.js – 248KB
    slick.js – 87KB
    slick.min.js – 42KB

    This is only a very partial list but even just changing these over would lower your network load by 385KB, which would be a nearly 10% improvement in first load performance. There are likely many other JS and CSS files I didn’t include here that you should switch to minified versions.

    Consider Using a CDN
    Another thing you should consider, though this is dependent on your deployment model, would be to load the more common libraries from standard CDNs. This gives two advantages. First of all this would make better use of caching because if a user has been to any other web app that used the same CDN source for a common JS file then when they get to your app they won’t be downloading it at all because it would already be cached. Secondly, it allows more parallel downloads from the browser, which, given the sheer number of resources needed for your application, should give a nice boost in performance. Most web browsers limit the number of pipelines they will open to a single site. Since you are loading all of your JS and CSS and images from you are likely running into some sequential download performance bottlenecks. See this helpful StackOverflow for some of the pros and cons of this:

    • This topic was modified 1 year, 4 months ago by  roneddy.
    Jedi Master
    Member since: 05.11.2015
    Number of posts: 1450



    Hi Ron,

    I will forward your request to our product management team and they will evaluate it accordingly. However, as an fyi, we will have a new signing ceremony around Q3 of next year where the performance will be significantly improved.

    Haris Haidary
    OneSpan Technical Consultant

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.