Google’s Search Advocate John Mueller says there’s no rush for websites to switch away from dynamic rendering, despite a help document saying it’s not a long-term solution.

Mueller left a comment on a Reddit thread that asks for advice regarding dynamic rendering versus server-side rendering.

The question comes up because a recent update to a Google help document says: “dynamic rendering is a workaround and not a long-term solution.”

Further, the document recommends server-side rendering, static rendering, or hydration instead.

It’s understandable how someone implementing dynamic rendering could read that and conclude they need to switch.

However, Mueller clarifies that the differences between dynamic rendering and other solutions are the infrastructure setup and maintenance considerations.

It’s not that dynamic rendering will cause issues with Google or become unsupported any time soon.

Here’s what Mueller has to say about dynamic rendering versus server-side rendering.

Mueller: Dynamic Rendering Isn’t Going To Cause Issues With Google

In a Reddit thread, an SEO professional seeks information on the benefits of switching from dynamic rendering.

A Google help document advises making the switch, but it would be a significant undertaking for a web development team.

As far as SEO is concerned, is it worth the time and effort?

Here’s what Mueller says:

“There are no SEO ranking-bonuses for implementing it one way or another – they’re just different ways of making the content indexable (as is client side rendering). The differences between dynamic rendering and server side rendering from my POV are more in terms of practical infrastructure setup & maintenance (it can also affect speed, depending on how you have things set up).

There’s no rush to switch away from dynamic rendering, it’s not going to become unsupported or cause issues from Google. The change over time is just that nowadays, if you have a JS-based site, there are better options (either good CSR or SSR) available, so doing things dynamically based on the user agent is often not the most efficient approach.”

Mueller says if you’re implementing dynamic rendering now, using a different solution is advised next time you do a website rebuild.

He continues:

“If you’re doing dynamic rendering now, it’s fine to look at the options and write up the pros & cons for you, of course. I imagine most won’t be convincing for a stretched engineering team. However, if you’re planning on doing a rebuild of the site, let them know that they don’t need to spend too much time on dynamically rendering the content. At the same time, know what to watch out for too :-).

This is where knowing some JS as an SEO really pays out – you don’t have to do the coding, but JS is a part of all modern websites, and it’s up to you to be able to figure out if there are issues with how it’s implemented. If you’re doing dynamic rendering now, it’s fine to look at the options and write up the pros & cons for you, of course. I imagine most won’t be convincing for a stretched engineering team. However, if you’re planning on doing a rebuild of the site, let them know that they don’t need to spend too much time on dynamically rendering the content.“

Hopefully, that helps put your mind at ease if you had similar concerns as the Reddit user.

Source: Reddit

Featured Image: Leremy/Shutterstock