On 2/22/14, 1:39 PM, Nicholas Nethercote wrote:
On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 11:22 PM, Andreas Gal <andreas....@gmail.com> wrote:
So, I'm wondering how much effort we should put in reducing the number
of ChromeWorkers.
We should continue to use JS in Chrome where it makes sense. Its often easier
and faster to write some functionality in JS (and sometimes also safer), and it
tends to be more compact when we ship it. In addition to purging caches and
stopping idle workers the JS team is also working on making workers (and JS)
more memory efficient in general. Naveed might want to chime in here.
Brian Hackett's been making great progress in reducing the overhead of
workers. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=964059 and
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=964057 both landed this
week, reducing the overhead of a trivial worker from ~1 MiB to ~0.2
MiB. And https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=864927 is the
meta-bug, which has ideas for further improvements.
Naveed told me that bug 941783 is meta-bug for all B2G DOM worker
optimizations, beyond just memory reduction. He is preparing a bug
backlog to prioritize those issues.
chris
_______________________________________________
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
