Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Reorganise the Performance Metrics section #6587

Closed
pet-ro opened this issue Nov 16, 2018 · 3 comments
Closed

Reorganise the Performance Metrics section #6587

pet-ro opened this issue Nov 16, 2018 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels

Comments

@pet-ro
Copy link

pet-ro commented Nov 16, 2018

Lighthouse and its documentation are great. Thank you.

Here a transparency improvement suggestion:

IMHO the Performance Metrics section of the Lighthouse Viewer could do a better presentation job.
I'm a newbie to this topic, may this does matter to professionals.

I would prefer a presentation which makes transparent that the 6 metrics
can be grouped into two groups (category A and categorie B).

What is the motivation or use case for changing this?
I found the current grouping not transparent.

Current Grouping
Cat A Cat A
Cat A Cat B
Cat B Cat B

How is this beneficial to Lighthouse user?

Newbies can more intuitively grasp the grouping of the metrics

Paint related Interactivity related
FCP FCI
FMP TTI
SIP ELI

SIP is a new acronym; Speed Index of Paint
Now all paint related metrics use the suffix 'P'.

Similar it might be possible to use the suffix 'I' for all interactivity related ones.
new FCI short for First CPU Idle
new ELI short for Estimated Latency of Input

Feature request summary

Just give all Paint related metrics a suffix P
and Interactivity related metrics a suffix I.

Currently there are 3 Paint related metrics and 3_Interactivity related_ metrics.
Present each metric type in its own column
in the Performance section of report rendered by the LightHouse Viewer in Chrome.

@patrickhulce
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks for the suggestions @pet-ro! To give a bit of insight into why they're currently grouped the way they are...

The ones on the left have the most weight in the score and are the most important metrics we care about. The ones on the right are mostly used in diagnosing why the ones on the left aren't doing so well. Admittedly we never ended up labeling them this way and so what's left is fairly confusing, but that was the original rationale :)

@centminmod
Copy link

@patrickhulce curious why you don't order the metrics by their weights ? TTI, Speedindex, FCP on the left side ?

@brendankenny
Copy link
Member

These are being reorganized somewhat (and some replaced) under #8185 and #8331

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants