Re: Testing required: visited link performance

In article <534d633ccbtim@timil.com>,
Tim Hill <tim@timil.com> wrote:

> Site: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/
> Build #1177: 13.0s
> Build #1178: 13.7s
> Build #1179: 22.6s

> Site: http://slashdot.org/
> Build #1177: 8.5s
> Build #1178: 8.4s
> Build #1179: 25.0s

The #1179 results are odd. Was that with JavaScript on, or with the
computer busy doing something else?

--

Michael Drake (tlsa) http://www.netsurf-browser.org/