Static Generation vs Incremental Static Regeneration

Developers should use Static Generation when building websites with predictable, infrequently updated content, as it provides superior performance, security, and scalability compared to server-side rendering meets developers should use isr when building websites that require fast loading times and seo benefits of static pages but also need to display frequently updated content, such as e-commerce product listings, news articles, or user-generated content. Here's our take.

Static Generation

Nice Pick

Developers should use Static Generation when building websites with predictable, infrequently updated content, as it provides superior performance, security, and scalability compared to server-side rendering

Pros

• It is ideal for blogs, documentation sites, and e-commerce product pages where SEO and fast load times are critical
• Related to: next-js, gatsby

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

Incremental Static Regeneration

Developers should use ISR when building websites that require fast loading times and SEO benefits of static pages but also need to display frequently updated content, such as e-commerce product listings, news articles, or user-generated content

Pros

• It is particularly useful in frameworks like Next
• Related to: next-js, static-site-generation

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

The Verdict

These tools serve different purposes. Static Generation is a methodology while Incremental Static Regeneration is a concept. We picked Static Generation based on overall popularity, but your choice depends on what you're building.

The Bottom Line

Static Generation wins

Based on overall popularity. Static Generation is more widely used, but Incremental Static Regeneration excels in its own space.