Effectively Managing Memory at Gmail Scale
html5rocks.com
Effectively Managing Memory at Gmail Scale
1–10 of 50 posts
Re: Effectively Managing Memory at Gmail Scale
#2It is rather odd to think about "scaling" to a single computer, isn't it? This is more bloat management than scaling.
Re: Effectively Managing Memory at Gmail Scale
#3It is rather odd to think about "scaling" to a single computer, isn't it? This is more bloat management than scaling.
I was thinking much the same - the Gmail backend surely has scaling issues, but the frontend should be relatively simple. Afterall, you can still use the basic html view if you want, the ajax view is just some icing on the cake; it can't be that resource hungry unless there are bugs.
Re: Effectively Managing Memory at Gmail Scale
#4>While JavaScript employs garbage collection for automatic memory management, it is not a substitute for effective memory management in applications.
And then they continue to make use of the Javascript's GC in order to do effective memory management... at gmail scale...
Re: Effectively Managing Memory at Gmail Scale
#5Gmail still slow.
Unrelated: Why haven't Google implemented a Google.com-quality-level search for email?
Re: Effectively Managing Memory at Gmail Scale
#6It is rather odd to think about "scaling" to a single computer, isn't it? This is more bloat management than scaling.
I was thinking much the same - the Gmail backend surely has scaling issues, but the frontend should be relatively simple. Afterall, you can still use the basic html view if you want, the ajax view is just some icing on the cake; it can't be that resource hungry unless there are bugs.
There are always bugs in complex applications (especially when JS makes it this easy) and people leave their Gmail tab open for weeks: not an auspicious combination.
Re: Effectively Managing Memory at Gmail Scale
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was thinking much the same - the Gmail backend surely has scaling issues, but the frontend should be relatively simple. Afterall, you can still use the basic html view if you want, the ajax view is just some icing on the cake; it can't be that resource hungry unless there are bugs.
There are always bugs in complex applications (especially when JS makes it this easy) and people leave their Gmail tab open for weeks: not an auspicious combination.
Oh yes, I wasn't trying to criticize that. Every sufficiently large program will have bugs. It was just that the title implied this was a scaling issue, rather than a debugging issue.
Re: Effectively Managing Memory at Gmail Scale
#8I always found onedrive services to be faster than google drive(the pdf viewer for instance).It seems that,recently,Gdrive downgraded their default pdf viewer,while proposing third party alternatives(which is an interesting system,I'm in the process of developping a good epub viewer for gdrive).
Afaik,what MS does is,as much as possible,do things server side instead of client side.For instance,online excel calculations are done server side then the resulting cells are just HTML fragments sent to the ajax callback.
It makes client apps consume way less memory,since less data is stored on the client.
I have a crappy Android phone (2.x) and onedrive html app doesnt feel slow on it.On the other hand,I just cant use gmail(ajax versions) or google drive html apps.They are just not responsive.
Re: Effectively Managing Memory at Gmail Scale
#9>While JavaScript employs garbage collection for automatic memory management, it is not a substitute for effective memory management in applications. And then they continue to make use of the Javascript's GC in order to do effective memory management... at gmail scale...
It's "no substitute". I read that as: it doesn't free you from thinking about memory. GC or not, you still need to care about it.
Re: Effectively Managing Memory at Gmail Scale
#10Gmail still slow. Unrelated: Why haven't Google implemented a Google.com-quality-level search for email?
Gmail's email search is already the best in the space, by far. I'm sure there are improvements to be made, but zero external pressure to make them.