coozywana
Forum Replies Created
-
Hi Eugenio,
Thanks for the details. Should be all good now 👍.
https://status.staticdelivr.com/
Yes, this is the first time I’ve seen it timeout. I will investigate further.
Thanks again!
Hi Eugenio,
Thanks for letting me know. I agree, if WP Rocket is giving you the best results, it’s best to stick with that.
To be honest, making the assets CDN fully compatible with WP Rocket is basically impossible. StaticDelivr is a CDN for open-source assets, so it serves original files straight from the ww.wp.xz.cn repository. WP Rocket works by changing and combining those files into unique versions on your server. Since the files aren’t originals anymore, the CDN can’t find them to serve them.
It would be cool to see if LiteSpeed actually feels faster for users in different cities globally though. Sometimes a global CDN setup performs better in the real world for distant users, even if local speed scores look similar.
Thanks again for all the help testing these things out! I’m glad the images are working well now.
Best regards.
Hi Eugenio,
WP Rocket doesn’t serve your CSS or JS through a CDN. It only minifies or combines them, but the files are still delivered from your own server. StaticDelivr actually serves assets from a CDN.
For example, your original theme file might be:
/wp-content/themes/twentytwentythree/1.0/style.cssStaticDelivr would turn that into something like:
https://cdn.staticdelivr.com/wp/themes/twentytwentythree/1.0/style.cssBut if WP Rocket rewrites it into a combined local file, such as:
/wp-content/cache/min/style-abc123.cssthen that file will always come from your server, not the CDN, because the original URL no longer exists for StaticDelivr to rewrite.
So the only real question is which is faster on your setup. Do you want to test whether your site loads quicker with StaticDelivr’s Assets CDN on and WP Rocket’s combining off, or with StaticDelivr off and WP Rocket’s combining on?
Best regards.
Hi Eugenio,
Were you having problems with the assets CDN by any chance – especially with Premium plugins or themes?
Thank you.
Great to hear! Let me know if anything else comes up.
Hi, thanks for the question.
The plugin does not use lazy loading or preloading. All images are standard
<img>tags, so the browser loads them normally and concurrently. Because the CDN delivers each image very quickly, usually around 50 ms, there is no performance benefit from adding lazy loading or preload.Lazy loading would actually make things slower. When you scroll, the browser waits until the image enters the viewport before requesting it. If the image is not cached yet, the first request takes around 400 to 500 ms to process, which creates a noticeable white flash while scrolling. With normal loading, all images are already requested at page load, so everything is ready when you reach it.
Preloading is also not helpful. Forcing the browser to preload images adds extra work during the initial HTML rendering, which can delay the first paint and slow down the start of the page. Since the CDN already loads images extremely quickly and the browser handles them concurrently, preloading does not provide any real benefit.
Let me know what you think.
Hi Eugenio,
All good, my pleasure 🙂 If any issues come up again, just let me know and I’ll look into it right away.
Hi Eugenio, it should be all working for all new images and gifs.
Ah I see. Thank you for raising this with me. I will fix this soon.
Thanks again Eugenio!
Forum: Reviews
In reply to: [StaticDelivr: Free CDN, Image Optimization & Speed] An excellent CDN pluginThanks for the great review! Really happy to hear it helped you hit 97 on mobile PageSpeed.
I’m glad I could help with the support questions, and I really appreciate you taking the time to write this. It helps a lot!WebP it is!
Thanks for testing!
Thats all good. Do you want to try setting format to AVIF and WebP on two seperate test in your PageSpeed Insights and see if AVIF is faster? I may be wrong.
Hi Eugenio,
Thanks again for the suggestion!
I just did some extensive testing and I actually explored this a couple of years ago, and at the time I decided to keep WebP as the default “auto” format instead of AVIF. The main reason is that, in most real‑world cases, WebP ends up outperforming AVIF in file size for photographic content, especially the kind of images people typically upload.
That said, AVIF can be smaller for certain types of images (smooth gradients, illustrations, low‑noise photos), so if you have any examples from your site where AVIF consistently produces a smaller result, feel free to share them. I’m always happy to double‑check and adjust the logic if it genuinely improves performance.
Best regards.
Hi Eugenio,
Thanks so much for confirming. I’m really glad everything is working smoothly now.
I really appreciate your patience and the detailed reports along the way, they helped improve the plugin for everyone. And as mentioned earlier, feel free to reach out to me personally anytime if you need help with anything at all.
Cheers 🙂
Hi Eugenio,Thank you for the report! I’ve just released version 2.5.1 which fixes this issue. Please update and let me know if everything is working for you now. 🙂
Cheers