Re:Firefox is back. It's time to give it a try
by logicallee on Thursday June 21, 2018 @07:36AM
(#17364106)
Can you repeat without ctrl-tabbing? What was Firefox usage then?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Firefox is back. It's time to give it a try
by detaro on Thursday June 21, 2018 @07:44AM
(#17364168)
Jumped to 950 MB, settled at ~800 MB. Deferred loading seems to do a lot, so I could imagine that different usage patterns make a big difference, but that would need a detailed look into how Firefox and Chrome manage memory for "stale" tabs. If I remember right Mozilla recently added improvements there, getting rid of their memory more aggressively?
Re:Firefox is back. It's time to give it a try
by logicallee on Thursday June 21, 2018 @07:52AM
(#17364227)
So, under actual usage (not ctrl-tabbing around to aggressively force-load things) it is 950 MB vs 5.3 GB. (I imagine for a comparable number of tabs?)
------
EDIT in response to your reply:
Please do! I agree that logging would be interesting.
Do you know, does Firefox defer/discard tabs again if they do fully load but you don't use them for a long time? Or are the only deferred tabs, ones that you never looked at this session?
Re:Firefox is back. It's time to give it a try
by detaro on Thursday June 21, 2018 @07:55AM
(#17364253)
I don't think you can count a freshly started browser that has only loaded 7 tabs (one per window) as "actual usage". I'd guess tabbing around triggered <50 tabs, that doesn't seem like a totally unrealistic working set, at least not when I'm actively researching something.
Maybe I should set up logging for this, might be interesting.
Re:Firefox is back. It's time to give it a try
by logicallee on Thursday June 21, 2018 @12:07PM
(#17366387)
Please do! I agree that logging would be interesting.
Do you know, does Firefox defer/discard tabs again if they do fully load but you don't use them for a long time? Or are the only deferred tabs, ones that you never looked at this session?