Caching and plugins
Hi, this is the second time I am posting on this topic, but I can't find the previous post. But if it's a duplicate I'm sorry.
I have two Wordpress accounts with Inmotion. I have set up the Inmotion Cache Manager on both, but it seems I have only set up the NGINX Helper plugin on one (not sure why I missed the other one). I am using a very minimalist theme, but by the time I add graphic, plugins, etc, the load times are slowing down, and I want to speed them up if I can.
I have tried various optimisation plugins (WP Fastest Cache, Hummingbird, WP_Optimize, Autoptimise), singly and sometimes a caching plugin in combination with the Autoptimise plugin. After extensive testing, I found that none of these different plugins improved site speed, and I stayed with the Inmotion cache manager.
I've searched on the web and there is so much conflicting advice. So I'm wondering if you could clarify these questions please:
1. Do I need to use both the Cache Manager and the NGINX Helper plugin for best results?
2. If I have both of them, do you think I need any other optimisation plugins? Which do you suggest?
3. Google Page Speed Insights identifies "Eliminate render-blocking resources" as a major issue, and recommends I " inline critical assets or defer less important resources". Does Inmotion cache manager or NGINX helper plugin address these issues? Would another optimisation plugin assist with these?
Thanks for any advice you can offer me.
Hello ErichH,
Thanks for your questions concerning the Caching and plugins. If you are on a WordPress-optimized server, then NGINX is being used for reverse proxy caching.
1. The basic cache management is being done by the cPanel Cache Manager. The NGINX Helper is more granular as it has the capability to set event specific actions to manage the cache. So, yes you can use both. If you want to be very specific for purging your NGINX cache, then you would use the NGINX Helper.
2. The need for optimization plugins will depend on the content of your site. If you use large graphics, then you should make use of a graphic optimization plugin like EWWW Image Optimizer. There are others, but I did hunt for your account based on your email address and I found 2 sites (not sure if these were the ones that you are referring to. I typically use a 3rd party optimization tool like GTMetrix. It uses many of the same tools as some other optimization sites (e.g. Page Speed), but it brings them all together under multiple tabs and gives you really good recommendations. Your 2 sites got an A grade for speed and performance. The only thing that stood out to me was the recommendation to use a Content Distribution Network (CDN). There are many CDN options available - just be aware that most are not free. If your graphics aren't going to change too much, then you may want to consider making sure they're optimized for the web and then put them directly on the server. Video should NOT be played from the web server. I suggest an optimized solution like YouTube or Vimeo to provide video playback for your site viewers. These video solutions are basically specialized video distribution networks, so when people play a video link from your site, then they are seeing the video optimized to their location on the network. Additionally, video from either of these solutions are optimized when saved to their servers and can be adjusted to the connection speed of the viewer.
3. The messages that you got from Page Speed - "Eliminate render-blocking resources and "inline critical assets or defer less important resources" have to do with eliminating unnecessary processing and references to resources that reside outside your website. In other words, if you have website elements that don't necessarily need processing in order to be displayed (e.g. javascript) or graphics that are not saved directly to your website, then you can improve performance by replacing the script-dependent elements and saving static graphic files directly to your site.
Though to be honest, when I looked at your websites (if those were the correct ones), everything did appear to be optimized. The other nice thing about GTMetrix is that they tell you how much of an impact their recommendations would make to your website. And both of the suggestions you listed were medium-low to low in terms of improving performance.
You can see the results I compiled here, or you can go directly to the sit and run the test again to see how it's currently performing.
https://gtmetrix.com/reports/is-there-a-god.info/u4DLjW5A/
https://gtmetrix.com/reports/the-way.info/aU8wrjA5/
I hope that helps to answer your questons! If you have any further questions or comments, please let us know.
Kindest Regards,
Arnel C.