For context, my last post describes what I’m building, which should be a quick week of work.
Astro is wonderfully suited for content heavy sites. My app is going to be sprinkled with a little extra interactivity. I’m thinking of adding in React for that, but with hitting two APIs… Could that hurt performance?
You can use devtools to see how heavy the site will end up being. Look at how many bytes are transferred to get an idea. Make sure to disable caching. It’s going to depend, but I saw one company website go up to 40MB for one page which is obviously not ideal and they used React
So in theory anything/everything “hurts” performance, but you have more leeway and options than you think.
Namely what is you performance margin. Performance is largely an architectural decision not an individual feature concern. A majority of features you can do can degrade performance, but by how much and how your app is used/works all informs how much you can “pay” for worse performance.
Simply put adding a feature in javascript and having that javascript run (client or otherwise) can impact performance. Probably not much, but there’s nuance.
Something as simple as loading an image or video takes up way more of your “performance allotment” than something like writing some extra javascript code.
Even something like rest vs graphql has more nuance than just performance concerns.
I’d use astro, add react, build your feature then use the common tools (chrome devtools, like lighthouse) to get an idea of how the app performance is and what is slow and why and just use it as a reference point for a similar stack/app later.