As someone new to Solid and SolidStart, I understand the importance of performance. However, I was surprised to see that the Lighthouse score on docs.solidjs.com only reached 70 for performance, as measured by pagespeed.web.dev. The primary issue seems to be a total blocking time of over 5000 ms, caused by the large JavaScript asset client-BVBETh-o.js.
I'm unsure why the website requires such a large JavaScript file for its advanced features. Since the SolidStart documentation should exemplify speed and excellent performance metrics, it would be beneficial to optimize the bundle size. For comparison, SvelteKit (https://kit.svelte.dev/) has a largest JavaScript asset of only 23 KB (gzipped), whereas client-BVBETh-o.js is 457 KB (gzipped).
Thanks for reporting the issue. The docs project has focused mostly on content and will continue to do so before there are plans to optimize the payload.
What is this request related to?
Request
📋 Suggested
https://docs.solidjs.com/ https://pagespeed.web.dev/analysis/https-docs-solidjs-com/q2ourx04r6?form_factor=mobile
📋 General description or bullet points
As someone new to Solid and SolidStart, I understand the importance of performance. However, I was surprised to see that the Lighthouse score on docs.solidjs.com only reached 70 for performance, as measured by pagespeed.web.dev. The primary issue seems to be a total blocking time of over 5000 ms, caused by the large JavaScript asset client-BVBETh-o.js.
I'm unsure why the website requires such a large JavaScript file for its advanced features. Since the SolidStart documentation should exemplify speed and excellent performance metrics, it would be beneficial to optimize the bundle size. For comparison, SvelteKit (https://kit.svelte.dev/) has a largest JavaScript asset of only 23 KB (gzipped), whereas client-BVBETh-o.js is 457 KB (gzipped).
🖥️ Reproduction of code samples in StackBlitz
No response