On 06/03/2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 04:25:08PM +0100, ropers wrote: > <snip> > > > > > > NB: As for the number of open tabs, Firefox 2.0.0.x is a real sieve > > when it comes to memory. It leaks and leaks and leaks... The upcoming > > Firefox 3 is reportedly going to be a major step forward, but I > > haven't tried it yet. > > > > The desktop machine I'm currently using runs Ubuntu, so this may or > > may not be directly comparable, but in my experience Firefox 2.0.0.x > > **can** still be used with >20 tabs spread over 6 windows -- IFF you > > throw truckloads of RAM at it (e.g. 1-2GB), and use a very > > comprehensive ABP filter list, and pkill firefox and restart&restore > > it at least once a day (Firefox 2 allegedly doesn't free memory when > > tabs are closed). > > > > > wow. Firefox 2.0.0.12 running on OpenBSD 4.3beta from 29 Feb on a > Powerbook G3 with a whopping 256meg of memory and a blinding fast > 333mhz G3 happily opens 17 tabs (my default startup) and is quite > usable. For the first 30 secs or so Firefox isn't usable. When done > it's sucked 125meg and taken 3 mins of CPU. After about 30 of those > cpu seconds you can easily swap from tab to tab. > > OpenBSD 4.2 with what ever Firefox shipped in ports (2.0.0.6 maybe) > basically felt like it worked the same. > > Is the PPC that much more efficient? :-)
I haven't really done any rigorous testing, and I probably don't really need 1-2 GB for 20-30 tabs, but the above is what I currently use. ((I don't really care, because I plan on wiping this PC soon anyway, and I hope I'll be able to again use OpenBSD more.)) That said, my hunch is, PowerPC vs. x86 prolly hasn't much to do with it. IMHO (a) Ubuntu is MUCH less hardware-efficient than OpenBSD, and (b) I take it from your post that you're probably not using Flash -- I think heavy Flash in multiple tabs (even though eg. videos are not running concurrently) is probably the main culprit. In a nutshell: "Flash. The FASTEST way to send **all** of your clock cycles to /dev/null.(TM)" (Yeah. That's about it. That, and incompetently written s-sss-zzzloooooooooowww ECMAScript that uses polling and shit **cough** Digg **cough**.) To be honest, a further discussion of the performance issues seen with Ubuntu/Flash/bad JavaScript is off-topic for an OpenBSD mailing list. Feel free to email me off-list though. :) I might even get around to answering. ;-) Cheers, --ropers
