If the "Flotato" program sold by this website gets any traction it will immediately get fingerprinted and banned by the bot-detection algo vendors.
Browsers eating RAM
111–120 of 171 posts
Re: Browsers eating RAM
#112I used to have this problem, I routinely keep well over 100 tabs open. Then I disabled default loading of javascript and now I never hear my fans.
In spite of how it seems the "web keeps getting bloatier", something did in fact improve during the last year or two. A whole lot more websites now at least load with javascript turned off. That definitely wasn't the case around ~2016 or so.
I tried disabling javascript a few years ago and the entire web broke. Tried it again last year and have had much more success.
Re: Browsers eating RAM
#113Earlier quoted context omitted.
The crazy thing to me is the ads aren't even the biggest problem anymore: it's clunky SPAs that load 1MB of js to save 10kb of HTML on navigation.
I know when I've clicked on a medium.com link because my CPU fan spins up chewing on all the framework junk.
In Firefox reddit (new version) will sit at about 50% of a core on my laptop. Simple mouse hover effects on the page lag about half a second behind my actual mouse cursor. YouTube (while not playing a video) will use about 15% of my cpu, even when idle in a background tab.
I’m not sure if the bug is in Firefox or in the sites, but it’s awful. I don’t understand how these issues don’t get fixed immediately. I thought for sure after the new reddit redesign landed that they’d iron out the performance issues in a month or two but I swear if anything it’s gotten worse.
Re: Browsers eating RAM
#114Wanted to learn about flotato after reading the post but the hamburger menu doesn't work on Firefox mobile...
Oh don't worry it also doesn't work on Safari mobile. It's just broken, not an incompatibility oversight.
Re: Browsers eating RAM
#115(Disclaimer: V8 dev) This post is unfortunately nonsense, because it's making a fundamental measurement error: not including renderer processes for Safari, and only measuring the browser process (which should be expected to be roughly O(1) memory in the number of tabs). To the author's credit, they _are trying_ to include child processes - I'm not sure why, but `psrecord` seems to not (in local testing) include child…
OK, but the situation still looks shameful. What exactly prohibits a web site from consuming all my RAM? I have never once seen a browser make a misbehaving site wait (frozen with no CPU) for me to confirm that sucking up more RAM is acceptable to me. What happens instead is that I hit a wall of slowness, forcing me to press the power button and lose all my other work. It's not very gradual, I think due to the nature…
What ever happened to computers being at least somewhat usable when all RAM is in use?
I seem to remember that being a pretty common condition back in the 90's. Things would get slow, sure, but not completely and utterly hosed.
When this happened to me recently (unattended Firefox process used up all RAM) the machine was simply never able to recover, even after killing the offending process (thereby making 30GB or so of RAM available) and waiting a half an hour.
Re: Browsers eating RAM
#116Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know when I've clicked on a medium.com link because my CPU fan spins up chewing on all the framework junk.
In Firefox reddit (new version) will sit at about 50% of a core on my laptop. Simple mouse hover effects on the page lag about half a second behind my actual mouse cursor. YouTube (while not playing a video) will use about 15% of my cpu, even when idle in a background tab. I’m not sure if the bug is in Firefox or in the sites, but it’s awful. I don’t understand how these issues don’t get fixed immediately. I thought…
Did you report it? You can use firefox profiler to learn what triggers CPU usage.
Re: Browsers eating RAM
#117Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know when I've clicked on a medium.com link because my CPU fan spins up chewing on all the framework junk.
In Firefox reddit (new version) will sit at about 50% of a core on my laptop. Simple mouse hover effects on the page lag about half a second behind my actual mouse cursor. YouTube (while not playing a video) will use about 15% of my cpu, even when idle in a background tab. I’m not sure if the bug is in Firefox or in the sites, but it’s awful. I don’t understand how these issues don’t get fixed immediately. I thought…
It probably works fine on the developers' 32-core 96GB workstation, so could not reproduce, problem is on your end.
Re: Browsers eating RAM
#118A lot of people here are criticizing the methodology. That's fair, I don't know enough to weigh in. But what I can say for sure is that in real-world use, on Mac, Safari absolutely feels lighter weight than other browsers. The fans spin up less, the battery lasts 30% longer, and other apps seem to be more responsive. I don't know if that's memory or cpu or what have you, but it's real. You do pay a price in actual pa…
I have plenty of anecdata to share on this confirming Safari is generally lighter, and for common usage that should be pretty reliable.
But from the same anecdata experience, what happens when it’s not is awful.
So the significant difference between Safari’s and Chrome’s model is how tabs are pooled into subprocesses. Safari quickly groups same-origin tabs into the same process which has a huge memory cost advantage. Chrome very aggressively spawns subprocesses per tab up to some pressure metric before it starts sharing processes across tabs, which consumes more memory but much more readily frees it too.
Safari’s model is basically more shrewd and probably better for average users, but the pathological case is GBs of unused memory with unclear priority and total system stalls. Chrome’s pathological case is much easier to reach but much easier to recover from because for the most part closing or killing a bad tab process fully relieves its resource pressure.
Re: Browsers eating RAM
#119(Disclaimer: V8 dev) This post is unfortunately nonsense, because it's making a fundamental measurement error: not including renderer processes for Safari, and only measuring the browser process (which should be expected to be roughly O(1) memory in the number of tabs). To the author's credit, they _are trying_ to include child processes - I'm not sure why, but `psrecord` seems to not (in local testing) include child…
istat menus seems to better report aggregate memory usage. I’m getting 750 mb for Safari on a clean launch with just those two tabs. (It drifts up to 850 mb and back down if I interact with them.)
Re: Browsers eating RAM
#120Earlier quoted context omitted.
I went to check my Firefox memory usage on Windows 10 (two tabs, extensions include ublock, facebook, bitwarden, contrast and multi-account containers) but I saw something unexpected. https://imgur.com/a/UJnV7ak Adding up the RAM totals 671.7MB on a 16GB device. But why do I have one Firefox with 4 sub-processes, and 3 (no 4) additional lone Firefox processes? I think the 4 background processes must be extensions in…
Check `about:processes`. (I'm not sure if this is only available in Nightly right now.) It lists all processes, threads, and their memory + CPU usage.
This is cool. I did not know this was a thing.