Turbolinks test

Well, by now, you've done all your arguing on Twitter. Is Turbolinks a good idea, or the Worst Thing Ever?

optimizing a bit early

See these guys? One of them said this:

"We should forget about small efficiencies, say about 97% of the time: premature optimization is the root of all evil"

Wisdom.

But what makes optimization premature? When you don't know if you should do it or not. How do you know?

measure twice, cut once

Measuring. It's good for you. You can do it. If you measure things, you can be sure what's up.

But like eating your veggies, nobody measures. Ever.

you're a scientist, dammit

Computer SCIENCE is called science for a reason, yo. Be a scientist. Don't just argue about stuff on blogs. Measure things. Then report back.

this test sucks

This probably isn't even a good test. I don't care. Tell me how it sucks. Let's figure it out. But having actual measurements beats complaining about shit on Twitter any day.

with little sleep branch

This has BCX's Javascript and CSS files, and adds a sleep 0.1 in the controller to simulate database access.

To run it:

$ bundle
$ rspec

Done.

What I get:

With 1000 pages:

$ rspec
       user     system      total        real
 no turbolinks 20.060000   2.490000  22.840000 (706.659372)
yes turbolinks 17.190000   2.110000  19.300000 (412.718228)

With 100 pages:

$ rspec  
       user     system      total        real
 no turbolinks  1.860000   0.260000   2.430000 ( 64.887915)
yes turbolinks  1.190000   0.120000   1.310000 ( 38.416124)