Live data from Hacker News

Heavy SSD Writes from Firefox

servethehome.com

91–100 of 361 posts

Re: Heavy SSD Writes from Firefox

#91
post #82

Firefox has been terrible for disk access for many years. I remember I had a post install script (to follow, I never actually automated) that I would run through in my linux boxes back in about 2003 that would cut down on this and speed up the whole system. Basically chattr +i on a whole bunch of its files and databases, and everything's fine again...

There's been some development the last 13 years.

Chrome was also pretty crappy in 2003. /s

Re: Heavy SSD Writes from Firefox

#92

Putting aside how this may not be all that bad for most SSD's, does anyone know when this behavior started? Firefox really started to annoy me with its constant and needless updates a few months back; the tipping point being breaking almost all legacy extensions (in 46, I believe). This totally broke the Zend Debugger extension, the only way forward would be to totally change my development environment. I'm 38 and no…

This has been the case for a long time, I just googled and first hit was an article from 2008.

source: http://www.ghacks.net/2008/07/09/change-the-session-store-in...

Re: Heavy SSD Writes from Firefox

#93
post #85
post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So even with a cheap drive, if you leave your browser open with tons of tabs, and the PC on 24/7, it'll still easily handle it? Real lifetimes are often a multitude of the endurance rating, BTW.

You're still using 1/4 of your write unendurable for your fricking web browser. And exceeding the endurance rating can make you ineligible for warranty service/replacement of the drive.

I dunno but I think plenty of people consider their web browser a pretty vital application.

Re: Heavy SSD Writes from Firefox

#94

Putting aside how this may not be all that bad for most SSD's, does anyone know when this behavior started? Firefox really started to annoy me with its constant and needless updates a few months back; the tipping point being breaking almost all legacy extensions (in 46, I believe). This totally broke the Zend Debugger extension, the only way forward would be to totally change my development environment. I'm 38 and no…

Much of the recent breakage was to introduce essential features that users have been loudly asking for for years, such as multi-process support and content processes in a security sandbox.

If you're intentionally running very old versions which by now have published exploits, then I can see that these are not things you would consider important.

Re: Heavy SSD Writes from Firefox

#95

Putting aside how this may not be all that bad for most SSD's, does anyone know when this behavior started? Firefox really started to annoy me with its constant and needless updates a few months back; the tipping point being breaking almost all legacy extensions (in 46, I believe). This totally broke the Zend Debugger extension, the only way forward would be to totally change my development environment. I'm 38 and no…

> developing for the sake of

It's exactly the opposite of this. Have you read through the FF update notes? The web standards are a moving goalpost - constantly evolving.

On top of that they've been slowly landing incremental improvements to Electrolysis that have allowed them to turn it on for more and more users without big risks to stability. You can't do that for a browser with "big bang" releases every year.

In the last years I think it's been shown that the only model that works for browsers is "evergreen".

Re: Heavy SSD Writes from Firefox

#96
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Replace Browser Crash with: Accidentally pressing Ctrl-w And yes, there are browser crashes without Flash

Who really cares about restoring browser state? Maybe I lose part of an HN or Facebook post I'd been writing, but that's it. The feature should be opt-in, IMHO.

I really care about it. I take advantage of it everyday. I close tabs and use ctrl+shift+t to reopen them, I reopen my browsers previous state after closing it, and after computer crashes I don't have to worry about losing any of my precious tabs.

Re: Heavy SSD Writes from Firefox

#97
post #7

Serious question: Is 12GB a day really going to make a dent in your SSD's lifespan? I was under the impression that, with modern SSDs, you basically didn't have to worry about this stuff.

Samsung's low cost line is under warranty up to 40TB/year. Tests have shown that the actual drive lifetime is several times that. So basically, no, you don't have to worry about this. Essentially, people are complaining that the disks they bought are being used for their intended purpose: making sure your data doesn't disappear on a power loss.

No, "people" are not complaining about that; it's a fine attempt at a straw man, though. What the article complains about through implication is that Firefox is unnecessarily writing too much data to disk.

Re: Heavy SSD Writes from Firefox

#98
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're in good shape. I'm at 337 tabs. ;-)

I made a simple firefox/chrome extension for people like you and me that horde tabs. You might find it useful to find tabs and quickly navigate to them by clicking on the link in the list. It's free and open source. The github page has a gif showing usage. Chrome Extension: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/tabist/hdjegjggiog... Firefox Extension: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/tabist/ source…

Your chrome link is broken.

Anyway I used an extension like this for awhile, called session buddy. But now I just use control+D and bookmark all my tabs. Then you get bookmark syncing, and you can save your tabs when you export bookmarks, or wget them to have a local archive, etc. It's just more convenient, and one less extension I have to worry about stealing my personal information or bugging and corrupting my data.

Re: Heavy SSD Writes from Firefox

#99
post #85
post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So even with a cheap drive, if you leave your browser open with tons of tabs, and the PC on 24/7, it'll still easily handle it? Real lifetimes are often a multitude of the endurance rating, BTW.

You're still using 1/4 of your write unendurable for your fricking web browser. And exceeding the endurance rating can make you ineligible for warranty service/replacement of the drive.

The web browser is basically everything I do, though. My email is in it, my code review is in it, my IM is in it, on some of my machines my terminals are in it (via the Chrome mosh app).

Re: Heavy SSD Writes from Firefox

#100
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My home desktop is an i5-1620 with 64G RAM running Ubuntu 16.04, and Firefox just hiccups and lags, period. It is sad. I need to find time to experiment with Chrome while blocking all the Google chatter to see how functional it remains without being able to tattle to the mothership (otherwise I won't use it).

Why not Chromium?

I personally wouldn't recommend chromium because they've been known to do some shady things: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=786909

I'd imagine someone like the above poster would be concerned about that. At least I know I am

Post reply on HN