问题
This will probably get a pretty nasty response, but my server isn't the fastest at the moment, and my site loads much faster if I hotlink from the jQuery homepage so they server the content. Is this bad to do? Does jQuery eventually remove those js files from their page?
回答1:
Better hotlink it from Google API libraries.
Very big advantages:
- Google is fast and highly available
- Separate hosts, allows the client to load JQuery simultaneously with your pages and images (browsers support only a limited number of connections per host)
- Probably even faster still, because many websites use it, so this Google version is probably in your visitor's cache anyway.
回答2:
Are you using their official CDNs? A lot of people do.
I'm not sure why everyone is so quick to say Google. The above link says very specifically that you can hotlink to the jQuery CDN:
jQuery CDN (via Media Temple)
http://code.jquery.com/jquery-1.6.1.min.js Minified version
http://code.jquery.com/jquery-1.6.1.js Source version
回答3:
Instead use Google's CDN. That is what it was designed for.
回答4:
if it is bad I haven't heard about it. However you can use a CDN for better performance probably. Google and Microsoft also serve jQuery through their CDN for free.
cdnjs: https://cdnjs.com/libraries/jquery/
Google's CDN: http://code.google.com/apis/libraries/devguide.html#Libraries
jQuery's CDN: http://docs.jquery.com/Downloading_jQuery#CDN_Hosted_jQuery
MS's CDN: http://www.asp.net/ajaxlibrary/cdn.ashx#Third-Party_Files_on_the_CDN_14
回答5:
If the library is not intended for loading from the URL, I would avoid it.
However, Google provides hosted versions:
http://code.google.com/apis/libraries/
回答6:
You can use Google Libraries and link it from there : )
回答7:
You should use Google's hosted versions:
http://code.google.com/apis/libraries/devguide.html
回答8:
Yes, it is bad. For your site - it will run slower. For their site - imagine what happens if everyone used it!
来源：https://stackoverflow.com/questions/6514072/is-it-bad-to-hotlink-jquery-from-jquery-com