Fiddler Extensibility: Flagging ASP.NET Performance Problems
Although Fiddler PowerToy - Part 2: HTTP Performance is quite dated article about Fiddler, I constantly find very useful and practical gems in it. Flagging performance problems by coloring outstanding requests is one of them. | Quick Resource Box |
In the article Eric Lawrence, the author and the creator of the Fiddler tool, shares simple technique of adding custom rules that color outstanding request – be it improper caching or large payload. Adding Custom Rules To FiddlerI am using Fiddler v. 2.2.8.6. To add customer rules follow these steps:
static function OnBeforeResponse(oSession: Session)
// Flag files over 25KB if (oSession.responseBodyBytes.length > 25000) { oSession["ui-color"] = "red"; oSession["ui-bold"] = "true"; oSession["ui-customcolumn"] = "Large file"; } // Mark files which do not have caching information if (!oSession.oResponse.headers.Exists("Expires") && !oSession.oResponse.headers.Exists("Cache-Control")) { oSession["ui-color"] = "purple"; oSession["ui-bold"] = "true"; oSession["ui-customcolumn"] = "Review Caching"; }
Testing Fiddler Custom RulesTo test the Fiddler custom rules just navigate to the site you want to inspect. Here is what I get after navigating the home page of my blog: Highlighting potential performance problems helps quickly focus on it and start improving. Notice the request #3 colored in red – it exceeds 25 KB limit. Request #8 does not have caching header defined for it – colored in purple. Notice also the comments in Custom column. I could go further and and fine tune it, for example filter out 404, etc. Conclusion and RecommendationsRecent announcement from Google that it incorporates performance into ranking algorithm makes the performance a serious competitive advantage. I can easily imagine new breed Google performance consultants stealing a pie from SEO consultants. I guess it’d be a good move for any SEO consultant to get perf under their belt. Using Fiddler makes it really easy. Related BooksRelated Posts |
Comments
- Anonymous
April 11, 2010
Very nice idea!I could imagine extending it to include a number of perf-related guidelines, such as headers that aren't required (like "Server"), use of ETag, etc. - Anonymous
April 11, 2010
Rick, thank you! All the credits go to Eric of course. :)Yes, it's sounds like great idea - creating a set of rules for common perf issue. I'd streamline perf inspection of web sites, making it real fun :)