Latest Improvements to Duda’s Runtime Cache Service & Website Performance

July 2, 2020
0 minute read

Over the past couple of months, Duda has introduced a new cache service into our runtime sites architecture.

A cache is a component that allows quick access to frequently used data. In our case, we store rendered sites in cache so future requests can be served as quickly as possible. 

Previously, Duda used Redis as our cache layer. When we rendered a new page, we stored the results in cache and this meant the visitor's next request for the same page could be answered quickly without rendering the page again. 

Cache is controlled by a Time To Live (TTL) parameter which sets the time when data becomes invalid. In our case, we used a TTL of 2 hours, which meant every 2 hours we had to render the page again. Using this approach, we achieved a 50% request to site hit rate, and our general system performance in terms of response time was pretty good. 

However, this approach had some drawbacks: 

First, rendered pages were saved for just 2 hours. Why only 2 hours?

This was the first thing we wanted to address with our cache service solution. When we increased the TTL to 5 hours, we saw some increase in hit rate, but this also introduced some eviction events in our Redis cluster, meaning the cluster did not have enough room for all the data we wanted to store. This left us with two choices: (1) we could resize the Redis cluster; (2) we could decide not to use Redis for rendered pages. 

Second, in case of a failure in one of our servers (caused by flows that cause CPU spikes, database load or some other crash), our runtime sites were affected immediately.

With these two drawbacks in mind, we thought about a new cache solution to serve our rendered page.

Our two KPIs were to extend the cache time from hours to days, and to make the system resistant to downtime and slowness, so rendered sites would continue to perform as usual.

Need to build high-performance websites for your clients? Try Duda today!

Moving from Redis to Amazon DynamoDB



Redis is an in-memory cache service. As a caching solution, it delivers very high performance but is very expensive. In order to increase the TTL from hours to days, we needed to save much more data, hundreds of GB of rendered pages, which makes this solution impractical. 

We decided to try Amazon DynamoDB as persistence storage for the rendered pages. DynamoDB is a key-value and document database that delivers single-digit millisecond performance at any scale. 

The rendered pages were saved to DynamoDB with its TTL feature and it did an excellent job. It allowed us to increase rendered page TTL from 2 hours to 1 week. Additionally, because DynamoDB stores the data in disks and not in memory, it has the benefits of lower cost. 

The drawback of storing data on a disk is that it is much slower than in-memory. However, Dynamo is still really fast and we also added DAX (Amazon DynamoDB Accelerator) which is a cache layer above Dynamo that gives us the same performance we got with Redis for the 2 hour cache, while all the resources are stored in Dynamo for a few days. 

This solved the first issue, increasing cache TTL from 2 hours to several days. Nothing prevents us from increasing it to months; we won’t see eviction in Dynamo and more data will not affect performance. 

After some calibration, we achieved a hit rate of 85%

This graph shows the hit rate over the week.

Dedicated servers for resolving cache requests



The runtime server is the one that responds to rendered sites and all requests that come from published sites. In addition, these servers go through deployments of new code every day. Any failure in these servers, or any bad code that does heavy calculations, can immediately affect sites, even rendered sites that are already cached. 

To solve this problem, we decided to create new servers that will serve data from the cache. 

This is the only thing that this server is responsible for and it does it as quickly as possible. These servers are fully scalable and proactively respond to changing traffic.

When such a server receives a request for some page, it tries to find a rendered version of this page in the cache. If the page exists, it is served immediately. Otherwise, we pass the request to the runtime server, and it renders the page and caches it for the next time it is requested. 

This breakdown to serve page vs render page gives us the solution for the second problem. Any new code or problem that happens to the runtime server will not affect most site traffic. 

When such an incident occurred in our runtime servers, we had an excellent opportunity to see how the new cache service helped us.

This graph shows a downtime when our runtime servers stopped responding for a few minutes.

And this graph demonstrates that even though the runtime servers were down, the cache layer served most requests. 

So, even if a database crashes or the application servers stop responding, the cache keeps responding to 85% of requests.

Improvements to website performance

One of the biggest improvements is in response time. Due to the extended TTL and the optimized processing of cache requests, response time improved substantially.

Here’s some data to help understand the improvement.

  • Request to Site with no cache at all responded at 315ms.
  • Request to Site loaded with our previous cache solution responded at 30ms.
  • Request to Site that loaded from the new cache dedicated server responded at 5ms.

Additional Benefits

In addition to site performance, there were a few other benefits that came along with this update to our cache system, including:

  • From the moment we introduced this solution, we’ve seen a load reduction on our servers. Runtime servers that used to receive 100% of traffic now serve only 20% of requests. 
  • Our database is less loaded and less of a bottleneck in our architecture for runtime sites. If there’s a problem in the database, it will not have an immediate effect on runtime sites.
  • Overall, it’s easier to examine performance problems in runtime servers. Previously, if we had performance issues in the runtime server, it was hard to separate the cache requests from the render requests. Now, when most of the requests in runtime servers are for rendered pages and not cached data, it’s easier to find bottlenecks and issues. 

Stay tuned for more updates and improvements to Duda' architecture soon!


Did you find this article interesting?


Thanks for the feedback!
By Shawn Davis April 1, 2026
Core Web Vitals aren't new, Google introduced them in 2020 and made them a ranking factor in 2021. But the questions keep coming, because the metrics keep changing and the stakes keep rising. Reddit's SEO communities were still debating their impact as recently as January 2026, and for good reason: most agencies still don't have a clear, repeatable way to measure, diagnose, and fix them for clients. This guide cuts through the noise. Here's what Core Web Vitals actually measure, what good scores look like today, and how to improve them—without needing a dedicated performance engineer on every project. What Core Web Vitals measure Google evaluates three user experience signals to determine whether a page feels fast, stable, and responsive: Largest Contentful Paint (LCP) measures how long it takes for the biggest visible element on a page — usually a hero image or headline — to load. Google considers anything under 2.5 seconds good. Above 4 seconds is poor. Interaction to Next Paint (INP) replaced First Input Delay (FID) in March 2024. Where FID measures the delay before a user's first click is registered, INP tracks the full responsiveness of every interaction across the page session. A good INP score is under 200 milliseconds. Cumulative Layout Shift (CLS) measures visual stability — how much page elements unexpectedly move while content loads. A score below 0.1 is good. Higher scores signal that images, ads, or embeds are pushing content around after load, which frustrates users and tanks conversions. These three metrics are a subset of Google's broader Page Experience signals, which also include HTTPS, safe browsing, and mobile usability. Core Web Vitals are the ones you can most directly control and improve. Why your clients' scores may still be poor Core Web Vitals scores vary dramatically by platform, hosting, and how a site was built. Some of the most common culprits agencies encounter: Heavy above-the-fold content . A homepage with an autoplay video, a full-width image slider, and a chat widget loading simultaneously will fail LCP every time. The browser has to resolve all of those resources before it can paint the largest element. Unstable image dimensions . When an image loads without defined width and height attributes, the browser doesn't reserve space for it. It renders the surrounding text, then jumps it down when the image appears. That jump is CLS. Third-party scripts blocking the main thread . Analytics pixels, ad tags, and live chat tools run on the browser's main thread. When they stack up, every click and tap has to wait in line — driving INP scores up. A single slow third-party script can push an otherwise clean site into "needs improvement" territory. Too many web fonts . Each font family and weight is a separate network request. A page loading four font files before rendering any text will fail LCP, especially on mobile connections. Unoptimized images . JPEGs and PNGs served at full resolution, without compression or modern formats like WebP or AVIF, add unnecessary weight to every page load. How to measure them accurately There are two types of Core Web Vitals data you should be looking at for every client: Lab data comes from tools like Google PageSpeed Insights, Lighthouse, and WebPageTest. It simulates page loads in controlled conditions. Lab data is useful for diagnosing specific issues and testing fixes before you deploy them. Field data (also called Real User Monitoring, or RUM) comes from actual users visiting the site. Google collects this through the Chrome User Experience Report (CrUX) and surfaces it in Search Console and PageSpeed Insights. Field data is what Google actually uses as a ranking signal — and it often looks worse than lab data because it reflects real-world device and connection variability. If your client's site has enough traffic, you'll see field data in Search Console under Core Web Vitals. This is your baseline. Lab data helps you understand why the scores are what they are. For clients with low traffic who don't have enough field data to appear in CrUX, you'll be working primarily with lab scores. Set that expectation early so clients understand that improvements may not immediately show up in Search Console. Practical fixes that move the needle Fix LCP: get the hero image loading first The single most effective LCP improvement is adding fetchpriority="high" to the hero image tag. This tells the browser to prioritize that resource over everything else. If you're using a background CSS image for the hero, switch it to anelement — background images aren't discoverable by the browser's preload scanner. Also check whether your hosting serves images through a CDN with caching. Edge delivery dramatically reduces the time-to-first-byte, which feeds directly into LCP. Fix CLS: define dimensions for every media element Every image, video, and ad slot on the page needs explicit width and height attributes in the HTML. If you're using responsive CSS, you can still define the aspect ratio with aspect-ratio in CSS while leaving the actual size fluid. The key is giving the browser enough information to reserve space before the asset loads. Avoid inserting content above existing content after page load. This is common with cookie banners, sticky headers that change height, and dynamically loaded ad units. If you need to show these, anchor them to fixed positions so they don't push content around. Fix INP: reduce what's competing for the main thread Audit third-party scripts and defer or remove anything that isn't essential. Tools like WebPageTest's waterfall view or Chrome DevTools Performance panel show you exactly which scripts are blocking the main thread and for how long. Load chat widgets, analytics, and ad tags asynchronously and after the page's critical path has resolved. For most clients, moving non-essential scripts to load after the DOMContentLoaded event is a meaningful INP improvement with no visible impact on the user experience. For websites with heavy JavaScript — particularly those built on frameworks with large client-side bundles — consider breaking up long tasks into smaller chunks using the browser's Scheduler API or simply splitting components so the main thread isn't locked for more than 50 milliseconds at a stretch. What platforms handle automatically One of the practical advantages of building on a platform optimized for performance is that many of these fixes are applied by default. Duda, for example, automatically serves WebP images, lazy loads below-the-fold content, minifies CSS, and uses efficient cache policies for static assets. As of May 2025, 82% of sites built on Duda pass all three Core Web Vitals metrics — the highest recorded pass rate among major website platforms. That baseline matters when you're managing dozens or hundreds of client sites. It means you're starting each project close to or at a passing score, rather than diagnosing and patching a broken foundation. How much do Core Web Vitals actually affect rankings? Honestly, they're a tiebreaker — not a primary signal. Google has been clear that content quality and relevance still dominate ranking decisions. A well-optimized site with thin, irrelevant content won't outrank a content-rich competitor just because its CLS is 0.05. What Core Web Vitals do affect is the user experience that supports those rankings. Pages with poor LCP scores have measurably higher bounce rates. Sites with high CLS lose users mid-session. Those behavioral signals — time on page, return visits, conversions — are things search engines can observe and incorporate. The practical argument for fixing Core Web Vitals isn't just "because Google said so." It's that faster, more stable pages convert better. Every second of LCP improvement can reduce bounce rates by 15–20% depending on the industry and device mix. For client sites that monetize through leads or eCommerce, that's a revenue argument, not just an SEO argument. A repeatable process for agencies Audit every new site before launch. Run PageSpeed Insights and record LCP, INP, and CLS scores for both mobile and desktop. Flag anything in the "needs improvement" or "poor" range before the client sees the live site. Check Search Console monthly for existing clients. The Core Web Vitals report surfaces issues as they appear in field data. Catching a regression early — before it compounds — is significantly easier than explaining a traffic drop after the fact. Document what you've improved. Clients rarely see Core Web Vitals scores on their own. A monthly one-page performance summary showing before/after scores builds credibility and makes your technical work visible. Prioritize mobile. Google uses mobile-first indexing, and field data shows that mobile CWV scores are almost always worse than desktop. If you only have time to optimize one version, do mobile first. Core Web Vitals aren't a one-time fix. Platforms change, new scripts get added, campaigns bring in new widgets. Build the audit into your workflow and treat it like any other ongoing deliverable, and you'll stay ahead of the issues before they affect your clients' rankings. Duda's platform is built with Core Web Vitals performance in mind. Explore how it handles image optimization, script management, and site speed automatically — so your team spends less time debugging and more time building.
By Ilana Brudo March 31, 2026
Vertical SaaS must transition from tools to an AI-powered Vertical Operating System (vOS). Learn to leverage context, end tech sprawl, and maximize retention.
By Shawn Davis March 27, 2026
Automate client management, instant site generation, and data synchronization with an API-driven website builder to create a scalable growth engine for your SaaS platform.
Show More

Latest posts