I'm trying to figure out the best way to handle latency and failures in user interactions on my web application. I've identified two main approaches: 1) send the update to the server and only change the user interface if the server confirms success; or 2) immediately update the user interface, even before getting the server's response, and then revert if the update fails. The first option ensures that the interface doesn't show incorrect information but comes with a noticeable delay, which can be frustrating for users spread across different continents where latency can reach ~300ms. The second option provides faster feedback but risks displaying incorrect info until the server response comes in. I want to know how others approach this issue. Are there other effective strategies that could enhance the user experience?
3 Answers
Consider a hybrid approach! Show a pending state while waiting for confirmation, so the user knows there's an update in progress. That way, you're not misleading them.
Right? It improves user satisfaction and keeps them informed. I’d suggest including loading indicators wherever possible.
I usually go with optimistic updates (option 2), since I find server failures are rare for my apps, thanks to solid client-side validation. If you use a library like TanStack, reverting changes is a breeze. On the other hand, option 1 is just as valid and often used in many other frameworks. A quick loading spinner is totally acceptable; just let the user know you're on it!
I've typically used option 1 myself when latency was low, but that can be unpredictable. I’m definitely checking out TanStack for optimistic updates!
True! But I think flaky connections, especially on mobile, are a bigger risk than server downtime.
It really boils down to the context. If your application demands accuracy, opt for option 1. If speed is more critical, go with option 2 but be transparent with the user about potential issues. Google's approach with their editing tools does a decent job with notifications and keeping user expectations in check.
Agreed—critical tasks should definitely have the user sit and wait until completion for clarity.
Exactly! It's important to weigh what your app needs. User experience varies based on function.
That’s a good call! Some sites do this and it helps so much.