Short Answer
what would be better to use relative or absolute urls on http(s) websites?
For a developer, relative URLs are best for internal resources, and absolute URLs are your only option for external resources.
As the other answers and comments point out, your development environment will probably have a different file directory structure than your deployment (production) environment, and either may change from time to time. If relative URLs are used in development, such a change in your directory structure will have a little or no impact on your project views.
Explanation
Impact on page load speed?
None. The impact on page load speed is affected by the number, size and location of the resource files referenced. How you reference them is immaterial, because every resource still has to be requested from the web server, which must then feed the response (content) back to the browser for use. It does not matter if your URL is ../assets/images/logo.png
(relative) or https://example.com/assets/images/logo.png
(absolute). The browser still has to go there and get it. This is the part that costs you time.
Impact on SEO?
None. And for the same reason. The destination (location) is the same in either case, and the search engines know this instantly, just like a web browser does.
Impact of many external or internal?
The impact of too many (or too few) links to a resource on your SEO is a matter of further discussion and study. For our purposes here, I want to point out that there is no such thing as a relative URL to an external resource. Further, the impact on SEO will not likely be any different for internal resources on the basis of its relative versus absolute references (URLs).