# Does the amount of javascript effect visual complete?

**URL:** <https://discuss.httparchive.org/t/does-the-amount-of-javascript-effect-visual-complete/52>\
**Category:** Analysis\
**Created:** [July 16, 2013, 5:59pm UTC](https://discuss.httparchive.org/t/does-the-amount-of-javascript-effect-visual-complete/52 "2013-07-16T17:59:36Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 5\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![tscanausa](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex035/user_avatar/discuss.httparchive.org/tscanausa/32/1308_2.png) [@tscanausa](https://discuss.httparchive.org/u/tscanausa)\
**Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 5:59pm UTC](https://discuss.httparchive.org/t/does-the-amount-of-javascript-effect-visual-complete/52/1 "2013-07-16T17:59:38Z")

</div>

```sql
    SELECT pageid, rank, url, bytesJS, visualComplete 
        FROM [httparchive:runs.latest_pages] 
        WHERE 
            rank < 10000 AND 
            visualComplete != 0 AND 
            bytesJS != 0 
        ORDER BY visualComplete desc

```

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![igrigorik](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex035/user_avatar/discuss.httparchive.org/igrigorik/32/925_2.png) [@igrigorik](https://discuss.httparchive.org/u/igrigorik)\
**Post date:** [July 17, 2013, 6:24pm UTC](https://discuss.httparchive.org/t/does-the-amount-of-javascript-effect-visual-complete/52/2 "2013-07-17T18:24:27Z")

</div>

Hmm… I don’t think the above query actually answer the question. We would need at least another level of aggregation to bucket the amount of downloaded JS and then see if there is a correlation between these buckets and visualComplete.

Which, I’m guessing, is what @souders is doing on the HTTP Archive site: [http://httparchive.org/interesting.php#onLoad](http://httparchive.org/interesting.php#onLoad)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![tscanausa](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex035/user_avatar/discuss.httparchive.org/tscanausa/32/1308_2.png) [@tscanausa](https://discuss.httparchive.org/u/tscanausa)\
**Post date:** [July 17, 2013, 7:08pm UTC](https://discuss.httparchive.org/t/does-the-amount-of-javascript-effect-visual-complete/52/3 "2013-07-17T19:08:59Z")

</div>

@igrigorik There is bytesJS to correspond to what I beleive is the total amount of js downloaded for a page.

If you graph the data in a scatter plot you can find a positive trend line. I beleive there is alot of noice from sites that are infinte scroll with lots of images.

Do you have a suggestion on a quiery that might find a trend?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![igrigorik](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex035/user_avatar/discuss.httparchive.org/igrigorik/32/925_2.png) [@igrigorik](https://discuss.httparchive.org/u/igrigorik)\
**Post date:** [July 18, 2013, 12:27am UTC](https://discuss.httparchive.org/t/does-the-amount-of-javascript-effect-visual-complete/52/4 "2013-07-18T00:27:31Z")

</div>

Throwing the data into R gives the following (after eliminating some outliers):  
 ![](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex035/uploads/httparchive/36/d33dd3f252e01dec.png)

Pearson correlation between the two: 0.3878254 … which I guess qualifies as a “moderate positive” relationship. Intuitively, this makes sense, but I wouldn’t draw too many conclusions from it.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![tscanausa](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex035/user_avatar/discuss.httparchive.org/tscanausa/32/1308_2.png) [@tscanausa](https://discuss.httparchive.org/u/tscanausa)\
**Post date:** [July 18, 2013, 3:25pm UTC](https://discuss.httparchive.org/t/does-the-amount-of-javascript-effect-visual-complete/52/5 "2013-07-18T15:25:51Z")

</div>

I agree from this data nothing can be concluded.

I am sure that how the javascript is used is more important then how much is sent to the browser. I would guess serving 500kb of garbage will have less of an effect then a while loop calling append to the same element each time.

Though it would be interesting to track how much time a browser spends on rendering the effects of javascript.