Finally some movement on this! It really feels like an inferior experience in 2015 when your browser freezes from an unresponsive javascript in another tab.
Chromium circa 2008?
Multiprocess Firefox
31–40 of 171 posts
Re: Multiprocess Firefox
#32The problem with e10s (Electrolysis, codename for multiprocess Firefox) is it's actually less concurrent and runs far worse than normal Firefox, at least currently. It's downright unusable.
Switching tabs is just awful. If one page is busy loading something, I want to switch to another tab and see what's there, but instead I get to stare at the word "Connecting..." for several seconds. I just feel like I'm waiting for the browser to catch up all the time.
Re: Multiprocess Firefox
#33Goodbye RAM :) Or better for RAM, since I can now selectively kill and resume processes? Oh, I see it's not one process per tab. So does anyone know how I can more easily survive on 2GB with many tabs, other than by constantly killing processes?
Re: Multiprocess Firefox
#34I want (and do to an extent) to love Firefox. It was what at one time what expressed to me that there was an alternative to ie. But, I now, in the real world (at least the world I inhabit) can not find it to be better than chrome in any instance. From dev tools to performance. I had no intention of trying to test the differences; I happened to be using ffx for the proxy reason and was saddened to see it had crashed the following day.
Here's to hoping this speaks to progress in this regard.
(Speaking from OS X)
Re: Multiprocess Firefox
#35For the first time in years, the other day, I left Firefox open overnight. I use a proxy at work for Firefox due to strict filtering on our primary connection. I was monitoring the amtrack debacle in Philadelphia. I came in the next day to an entirely unresponsive Firefox. I had purposely gone to the home page before leaving to avoid bashing the processing with the live stream. Still, after ~12 hours of being on the…
Re: Multiprocess Firefox
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
Chromium circa 2008?
Or IE7 circa 2006. IE7 separated its UI and browser content in different processes. IE8+ group several tabs into one process when passing a threshold. This is much better for battery life compare to Chrome process-per-tab.
Re: Multiprocess Firefox
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
Chromium circa 2008?
Or IE7 circa 2006. IE7 separated its UI and browser content in different processes. IE8+ group several tabs into one process when passing a threshold. This is much better for battery life compare to Chrome process-per-tab.
Re: Multiprocess Firefox
#38Goodbye RAM :) Or better for RAM, since I can now selectively kill and resume processes? Oh, I see it's not one process per tab. So does anyone know how I can more easily survive on 2GB with many tabs, other than by constantly killing processes?
Between lazy tab restore and Chrome's process per tab memory overhead, Firefox is currently waaay better than Chrome for those of us coping with RAM Deficit Disorder and O(e^x) tab syndrome; I hope when the Fox gets process-per-tab they don't close that gap.
Re: Multiprocess Firefox
#39Goodbye RAM :) Or better for RAM, since I can now selectively kill and resume processes? Oh, I see it's not one process per tab. So does anyone know how I can more easily survive on 2GB with many tabs, other than by constantly killing processes?
I think I'd rather have multiprocess Firefox, even if I have to be a bit more judicious with my tab usage. I don't really know if having 40 tabs open is useful for me, or if it just makes me scatterbrained.
So I'd say that I keep many tabs open for the exact opposite reason. It enhances what I can do, due to the limitations of my brain.
Within a few decades, I expect for the concept of open tabs and bookmarks to merge. We'll be keeping far more tabs open, and flipping between them effortlessly, or scrolling back to that snapshot in time effortlessly.
I imagine closing tabs will be being like closing Emacs buffers. In practice, you practically never have the need to close an Emacs buffer, for anything you might have a small chance of wanting to work on again soon.
Re: Multiprocess Firefox
#40Please please test battery life impact while implementing the Multi-process stuff. I had to move away from Chrome just on the battery life issue. I suspect (but cannot conclusively prove) that the multi-process crap that Chrome has just drains your battery much faster. And yes I am perfectly aware of the supposed fix in Chrome for the battery killing bug.