Live data from Hacker News

WTF? Chromium (2016)

raeknowler.com

71–80 of 112 posts

Re: WTF? Chromium (2016)

#71
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox is not slower, it's just that most websites are optimised and tested only or mainly under Chrome. We are slowly getting back to the way things were with IE, but I hope that Mozilla won't give up and switch to blink or webkit like everybody else.

I'm curious as to how you can optimise a site to be faster specifically for Chrome?

Some ways it can happen:

1) Write browser-detection code and execute different code, with different performance characteristics, in different browsers. This happens, though less than it used to.

2) Write your code to hit the specific JIT heuristics in a Chrome particularly well, even if that requires contortions that slow it down in every other browser.

3) Write your code to effectively depend on Chrome bugs, where Chrome manages to be faster due to doing something that violates the standards.

4) Arrange the order in which you load your subresources/assets to play particularly well with Chrome's HTTP heuristics, even if it requires contortions that make the downloads slower in other browsers.

5) Write your code to rely on specific behavior in Chrome's HTML prescan, even if it requires contortions that break HTML prescans in other browsers.

That sort of thing.

Basically, if you just write some code, chances are it will run in times X, Y, Z in three different browsers, with the times closer or further apart depending on what features you're using and how the browsers optimized them, etc. But if you then set out to make it faster in X at the expense of any other considerations, you can get it to look like 0.9X, 2Y, 2Z. Or in some pathological cases 0.5X, 10Y, 10Z...

Re: WTF? Chromium (2016)

#72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems crazy to me how may projects depend on Chromium and V8 directly. Hopefully with Firefox's new improvements some of this will change.

Aside from community support, what is preventing Firefox's JS engine from being used to power a JS runtime?

Nothing really, and people use it for that. For example, https://github.com/0ad/0ad/tree/master/libraries/source/spid...

Re: WTF? Chromium (2016)

#73
Isn't the answer here to just run the latest stable version where the impact of field trials would be minimized? Even the stable version will probably have features/field trials in the command line if you start looking at it for render processes. It was also never established if this A-B testing through field trials was to blame. It is a valid way to roll out new features to users while trying to minimize breakage. Most of the unstable stuff happens with the unstable branches in any case (dev and to a lesser extent beta).

I do realize this isn't the best answer but I thought that the closer you get to canary/dev branch the more variation you'll be subject to. You can force field trials on and off at the command line if you know the option name and how to format it correctly.

e.g. for some older ones:

    --force-fieldtrials="EnableWin32kLockDownMimeTypes/Default/*EnableAppContainer/Enabled/"

Re: WTF? Chromium (2016)

#74
post #12

The fact that Chromium runs multiple processes is unrelated to any field trials. Chromium has always been multi-process; that's why individual tabs and plugins can crash without taking down the whole browser. Additionally, multiple processes are needed in order to implement sandboxing on Linux. Field trials have long been a part of Chromium too: https://blog.chromium.org/2012/05/changes-to-field-trials-in... . They a…

Multiple processes are used to implement sandboxing everywhere not just on Linux.

Just be careful with using chrome://flags to enable/disable certain things. First not everything will have an appropriate flags option. Second even if you enable/disable it in flags chrome may actually ignore it for certain things unless you actually force the field trial on the command line (I'm not sure how common this is).

Re: WTF? Chromium (2016)

#75
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The piece seems to suggest that a) multiple processes were the performance problem and b) that a field trial was causing that and "mak[ing] my computer unusable". Multiple processes do take more memory, but there's a good reason for them. While it's possible that it was a field trial that was causing issues here, there's no evidence to support that. Sadly, it was probably just excessive resource usage independent of…

The point of the post is that there is no way to opt out. We all understand more datapoints the better. But I also need to not be fucked with when I'm trying to work.

If you know the name of the field trial you should be able to opt-out on the command line provided you use the correct syntax with the --force-fieldtrials option.

However it was not established whether or not field trials (A-B testing) was even the problem merely that they existed on the chromium processes. Even the stable version of the browser will likely have these options on the command line.

Re: WTF? Chromium (2016)

#76
post #13
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>even if it is slightly slower than Chromium Funny thing is Firefox Quantum is both faster and eats less memory compared with Chrome. >not one that treats you as a pawn. And sadly, Firefox is the only browser that doesn't treat you like a pawn. For MS, Google, Apple, that chinese company which owns Opera you are just a pawn. (later edit : fixed the second remark).

>And sadly, Firefox is the only browser that does this. Not any more, I recently discovered that my firefox at work got infected with Firefox Pioneer. I didn't install that, it just appeared on list of my addons, no warning or anything. I heard on Reddit about similar cases from a few months ago, people got Safe Browsing installed without their knowledge. Both are signed addons from Mozilla. https://addons.mozilla.or…

Safe browsing is now built in to Firefox (and Chrome) so I'm not sure what you're seeing there. It hasn't shipped as an addon for quite some time.

Re: WTF? Chromium (2016)

#77

The Iridium website and logo look so professional and "enterprisey" that it looks like there's lots of money behind of it and they're going to screw you. A barebones or even text-only website would do them a favour.

I was curious what the site looked like, so I opened it.

Okay, I've seen worse desig--WHAT?! Wow, a marquee! Nice.

Re: WTF? Chromium (2016)

#78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox is not slower, it's just that most websites are optimised and tested only or mainly under Chrome. We are slowly getting back to the way things were with IE, but I hope that Mozilla won't give up and switch to blink or webkit like everybody else.

> Firefox is not slower, it's just that most websites are optimised and tested only or mainly under Chrome. Anecdotally.. Firefox was always slower rendering pages compared to other browsers. On some sites that I visited regularly, using FF was depressing. Later on, it started to suffer from caching issues on my machine. This caused a massive system slowdown. Tried Palemoon (non-blink\webkit, etc). It blazed through…

I thought Palemoon was basically firefox?

Re: WTF? Chromium (2016)

#79
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>even if it is slightly slower than Chromium Funny thing is Firefox Quantum is both faster and eats less memory compared with Chrome. >not one that treats you as a pawn. And sadly, Firefox is the only browser that doesn't treat you like a pawn. For MS, Google, Apple, that chinese company which owns Opera you are just a pawn. (later edit : fixed the second remark).

Inspired by this post installed Quantum beta and used it for the last few hours. Stuttering videos and subtly laggy typing. In what sense it is faster?

Its an alpha/beta, your experience is clearly a bug rather than the expected behavior. Personally my experience has been bug free but unfortunately obviously not all bugs have been squished.

I'm running nightly which in theory ought to have more chance at issues but more chances of fixes for said issues faster too.

Re: WTF? Chromium (2016)

#80
post #51
post #12

The fact that Chromium runs multiple processes is unrelated to any field trials. Chromium has always been multi-process; that's why individual tabs and plugins can crash without taking down the whole browser. Additionally, multiple processes are needed in order to implement sandboxing on Linux. Field trials have long been a part of Chromium too: https://blog.chromium.org/2012/05/changes-to-field-trials-in... . They a…

And? All that is written in the article. The question is whether or not forcing users to partake in field trials is a good idea.

But that question doesn't make sense. It contains the assumption that the alternative would be to never ship broken features to users. While the actual alternative would be that they'd ship the same broken feature to all users. Because at some point there's no other testing left.
Post reply on HN