On the bright side, server-side rendering is great for SEO. Your content is present before you get it, so search engines are able to index it and crawl it just fine. Something that is not so with client-side rendering. At least not simply. So instead of getting all of the content from the HTML document itself, you are getting a bare-bones HTML document with a JavaScript file that will render the rest of the site using the browser.
This is a relatively new approach to rendering websites, and it didn't really become popular until JavaScript libraries started incorporating it into their style of development. Some notable examples are Vue. Going back to the previous website, example. You can see right away that there are some major changes to the way the index.
For starters, instead of having the content inside the HTML file, you have a container div with an id of root. You also have two script elements right above the closing body tag. One that will load the Vue. This is radically different than using server-side rendering because the server is now only responsible for loading the bare minus of the website.
The main boilerplate. Everything else is handled by a client-side JavaScript library, in this case, Vue. If you were to make a request to the URL with only the code above, you would get a blank screen.
There is nothing to load since the actual content needs to be rendered using JavaScript. Now if you visit the URL, you would see the same content as you did the server-side example. The key difference is that if you were to click on the link the page to load more content, the browser will not make another request to the server.
You are rendering items with the browser, so it will instead use JavaScript to load the new content and Vue. Everything else will be left alone. Instead of having a different HTML page per route, a client-side rendered website creates each route dynamically directly in the browser.
This approach spread once JS frameworks made it easy to take. Server-side rendering allows developers to pre-populate a web page with custom user data directly on the server. It is generally faster to make all the requests within a server than making extra browser-to-server round-trips for them.
This is what developers used to do before client-side rendering. Client-side rendering manages the routing dynamically without refreshing the page every time a user requests a different route. But server-side rendering is able to display a fully populated page on the first load for any route of the website, whereas client-side rendering displays a blank page first.
Pre-rendering is a tradeoff between client-side and server-side rendering. Once the page is fetched, internal routing is done dynamically to take advantage of a client-side rendered website. A universal app sends to the browser a page populated with data. Then the app loads its JavaScript and rehydrates the page to get a fully client-side rendered app. This approach combines the advantages of the latest techniques available today. Subscription implies consent to our privacy policy.
Thank you! Check out your inbox to confirm your invite. Engineering All Blogs Icon Chevron. There's also. PHTML still work. If configuration seems okay, that's better off as a SO question on its own — Alex. The older file extensions are still sometimes used, but aren't so common. Quentin Quentin k gold badges silver badges bronze badges. Fluffeh Fluffeh You have to register the extension in your apache.
CommaToast CommaToast 9, 7 7 gold badges 50 50 silver badges 67 67 bronze badges. Soundz Soundz 1, 10 10 silver badges 16 16 bronze badges. Furthermore phtml is usually not configured as valid PHP-extension in most webservers.
I recommend you using Laravel. I already saw. Sign up or log in Sign up using Google. Sign up using Facebook. Sign up using Email and Password. Post as a guest Name. All logic, data fetching, templating and routing are handled on the client rather than the server. Client-side rendering can be difficult to get and keep fast for mobile.
It can approach the performance of pure server-rendering if doing minimal work, keeping a tight JavaScript budget and delivering value in as few RTTs as possible. Patterns like PRPL are worth evaluating in order to ensure initial and subsequent navigations feel instant. The primary downside to Client-Side Rendering is that the amount of JavaScript required tends to grow as an application grows. Experiences built with CSR that rely on large JavaScript bundles should consider aggressive code-splitting , and be sure to lazy-load JavaScript - "serve only what you need, when you need it".
For experiences with little or no interactivity, server rendering can represent a more scalable solution to these issues. For folks building a Single Page Application, identifying core parts of the User Interface shared by most pages means you can apply the Application Shell caching technique. Combined with service workers, this can dramatically improve perceived performance on repeat visits. Navigation requests like full page loads or reloads are handled by a server that renders the application to HTML, then the JavaScript and data used for rendering is embedded into the resulting document.
This is a novel solution, but it can have some considerable performance drawbacks. The primary downside of SSR with rehydration is that it can have a significant negative impact on Time To Interactive, even if it improves First Paint.
This can take seconds or even minutes on mobile. This quickly becoming frustrating Rehydration issues can often be worse than delayed interactivity due to JS.
The resulting HTML document contains a high level of duplication:. Only after bundle. Performance metrics collected from real websites using SSR rehydration indicate its use should be heavily discouraged. Rehydrating incrementally , progressively, or partially may be the key to making this technique more viable in the future.
Streaming server rendering allows you to send HTML in chunks that the browser can progressively render as it's received. In React, streams being asynchronous in renderToNodeStream - compared to synchronous renderToString - means backpressure is handled well. Progressive rehydration is also worth keeping an eye on, and something React has been exploring.
This can help reduce the amount of JavaScript required to make pages interactive, since client-side upgrading of low priority parts of the page can be deferred to prevent blocking the main thread.
0コメント