Re: More disc cache improvements
In message on 7 May 2015 Andrew Pinder wrote: > I wonder how stable the measurements are. I've just upgraded this > ARMini to RO 5.22 so have redone the measurements, still with NS#2771: > 161126 bytes/second. That's a massive increase. I had visited a > number of websites for that. > Trying going to just www.buxtonweather.co.uk (my homepage) as before > now gives 154588 bytes/second - only 4% different. > Have I missed something, or have ROOL done something spectacular in > the changes from 5.20 to 5.22? More measurements: Various sites including BBC election coverage: 212787 bytes/second Relaunch, load home page only and quit: 0 bytes/second ??? Same again, but force a refresh and then quit: 31146 bytes/second Same again, but after the buxtonweather.co.uk site has done its regular update (every five minutes): 0 bytes/second A wide range of sites, mostly new to me: 328299 bytes/second I'm curious that there is so much variability! Regards Andrew -- Andrew Pinder
Re: More disc cache improvements
In article <0c9680c054.andrew-...@waitrose.com>, Andrew Pinder wrote: > I'm curious that there is so much variability! Will some of this not be due to the fact that stuff is already in the cache and won't be saved again? -- Chris Johnson
Re: More disc cache improvements
In article <0c9680c054.andrew-...@waitrose.com>, [snip] > More measurements: > Various sites including BBC election coverage: 212787 bytes/second > Relaunch, load home page only and quit: 0 bytes/second ??? > Same again, but force a refresh and then quit: 31146 bytes/second > Same again, but after the buxtonweather.co.uk site has done its > regular update (every five minutes): 0 bytes/second > A wide range of sites, mostly new to me: 328299 bytes/second > I'm curious that there is so much variability! Yes, me too. Seemingly, large variance here too. Kind regards Brian
Yesterday Google stopped working with Netsurf. Has anyone any cures or suggestions? -- Richard Torrens. http://www.Torrens.org.uk for genealogy, natural history, wild food, walks, cats and more!
Re: Google
On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 01:26:32PM +0100, Richard Torrens (lists) wrote: > Yesterday Google stopped working with Netsurf. > > Has anyone any cures or suggestions? > It has been reported in the tracker as bug number 2314. Google have changed the non javascript portion of their reply (the noscript entry) to comtain completely broken html that simply causes the browser to refresh and fail to work usefully. We cannot do anything about this in NetSurf itself and need Google to unbreak their noscript, If you can get anyone there to listen that would be good as I have been unable to find someone to contact. This affects all non javascript browser (or those with it turned off) and cannot be worked around. > -- > Richard Torrens. > http://www.Torrens.org.uk for genealogy, natural history, wild food, walks, > cats > and more! > > -- Regards Vincent http://www.kyllikki.org/
Re: Google
In article <54c08c6513li...@torrens.org.uk>, Richard Torrens (lists) wrote: > Yesterday Google stopped working with Netsurf. > Has anyone any cures or suggestions? It still works if you put JS on - but, of course, that bu**ers up StreetMap. Now more than ever we need that magic JS ON/JS OFF button people have been asking for for yonks. Perhaps if there was a simple handle to make NetSurf rescan its choices (which there may well be!), a third party add-on just for RISC OS would be possible by changing the choices file on the fly. Or one of those "record your button presses and menu items" programs we used to have in the olden days. Anyway, it's a pain having to do Menu, Choices, Content, Radio icon every time you want to switch, and, as it's RISC OS-only problem, it's unlikely to be fixed by the developers. So, some more lateral thinking called for! John -- | John Williams | joh...@ukgateway.net Names for Soul Band:- Solar Fire *
Re: Google
On 8 May 2015 Richard Torrens (lists) wrote: > Yesterday Google stopped working with Netsurf. > Has anyone any cures or suggestions? I think it's absolutely essential that we have a javascript on/off button on the toolbar. If javescript is off google won't work and if it's on streetmap.co.uk won't work. -- Richard Porterhttp://www.minijem.plus.com/ Skype: minijem2 mailto:r...@minijem.plus.com I don't want a "user experience" - I just want stuff that works.
Re: Google
In article <54c08c6513li...@torrens.org.uk>, Richard Torrens (lists) wrote: > Yesterday Google stopped working with Netsurf. > Has anyone any cures or suggestions? If you mean Google Search, in its stead I've been using DuckDuckGo with RISC OS for some time. https://duckduckgo.com/html/ -- www.timil.com web sites * multimedia * training
Re: Google
In article <20150508125407.ga2...@kyllikki.org>, Vincent Sanders wrote: > On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 01:26:32PM +0100, Richard Torrens (lists) wrote: > > Yesterday Google stopped working with Netsurf. > > > > Has anyone any cures or suggestions? > > [Snip] > We cannot do anything about this in NetSurf itself and need Google to > unbreak their noscript, If you can get anyone there to listen that > would be good as I have been unable to find someone to contact. This > affects all non javascript browser (or those with it turned off) and > cannot be worked around. Strangely, though, it continues to work just fine with Browse, Fresco, Oregano and Oregano 2! That's 'just fine' in that Google search works as expected - and very quickly in Browse, Oregano and Fresco - and not 'just fine' in the appearance of the fetched pages. Given that three of the above browsers make no attempt at any form of JS it puzzles me why it is that NetSurf (v3.2 no JS) just goes into a loop when Google is invoked. Alan [Snip] -- Alan Calder, Milton Keynes, UK.
Re: Google
In article <54c08ebfb1joh...@ukgateway.net>, John Williams wrote: > Or one of those "record your button presses and menu items" programs we > used to have in the olden days. It's called KeyStroke, Alisdair Jørgensen, originally sold by Quantum software, now PD. It could indeed record such a train of button presses on menu items. I would Google a link for you but... KeyStroke also comes with various add-ons. Probably a button bar. I have a Search page on my own www site: I have just tried it and that call to Google works. www.torrens.org.uk/search.html -- Richard Torrens. http://www.Torrens.org.uk for genealogy, natural history, wild food, walks, cats and more!
Re: Google
In article <20150508125407.ga2...@kyllikki.org>, Vincent Sanders wrote: > It has been reported in the tracker as bug number 2314. Google have > changed the non javascript portion of their reply (the noscript entry) > to comtain completely broken html that simply causes the browser to > refresh and fail to work usefully. > We cannot do anything about this in NetSurf itself and need Google to > unbreak their noscript, If you can get anyone there to listen that > would be good as I have been unable to find someone to contact. This > affects all non javascript browser (or those with it turned off) and > cannot be worked around. I suspected as much ... Writing a browser is a somewhat Herculean task and keeping it operating with broken www sites is a never ending task. -- Richard Torrens. http://www.Torrens.org.uk for genealogy, natural history, wild food, walks, cats and more!
Re: Google
In message <20150508125407.ga2...@kyllikki.org> on 8 May 2015 Vincent Sanders wrote: > On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 01:26:32PM +0100, Richard Torrens (lists) wrote: >> Yesterday Google stopped working with Netsurf. >> >> Has anyone any cures or suggestions? >> > It has been reported in the tracker as bug number 2314. Google have > changed the non javascript portion of their reply (the noscript entry) > to comtain completely broken html that simply causes the browser to > refresh and fail to work usefully. > We cannot do anything about this in NetSurf itself and need Google to > unbreak their noscript, If you can get anyone there to listen that > would be good as I have been unable to find someone to contact. This > affects all non javascript browser (or those with it turned off) and > cannot be worked around. Which version of NetSurf are we talking about here? I'm on 3.4 (Dev CI #2771) on RO 5.22 and haven't seen any problems with Google. Regards Andrew -- Andrew Pinder
Re: More disc cache improvements
In message <54c085ed15ch...@chris-johnson.org.uk> on 8 May 2015 cj wrote: > In article <0c9680c054.andrew-...@waitrose.com>, >Andrew Pinder wrote: >> I'm curious that there is so much variability! > Will some of this not be due to the fact that stuff is already in the > cache and won't be saved again? I expect so, but if so it makes it difficult to assess the performance of the cache without explicit instructions on whether it should be cleared. Regards Andrew -- Andrew Pinder
Re: Google
On 8 May 2015, Andrew Pinder wrote: [snip] > Which version of NetSurf are we talking about here? I'm on 3.4 (Dev > CI #2771) on RO 5.22 and haven't seen any problems with Google. Try tuning off JavaScript. Tony
Re: More disc cache improvements
OK perhaps I needed to be more explicit in what I wanted to achieve from this testing. I am interested in the persistent disc cache write performance on different platforms, especially RISC OS, to see if my recent changes improve the situation there.. This means the browser must be used to retrieve numerous web pages with lots of cacehable content (images, html, css etc.) and given time to write that data to disc. This usually happens in the background while the user is reading the page they just loaded. It is not useful (or sufficient) to simply load the browser, visit a page and exit. This is explicitly why I asked for help from real users because developers usage data is not representative. So if you participate please do run the browser for a while for your usual browsing session and return the information at the end. The pages you visit, the speed of your connection and the sites you visit have no bearing on the results I am after. As long as the sites data is cacehable in some way it should be sufficient. The information I want is contained in the log file at exit as most of you have discovered. I have improved whats reported with build CI 2774 and would appreciate two lines of output which appear all together near the end of the log. An example is: content/fs_backing_store.c finalise 1613: Cache total/hit/miss/fail (counts) 2620/240/2380/0 (100%/9%/90%/0%) content/llcache.c llcache_finalise 3361: Backing store wrote 96531600 bytes in 6617 ms average 14626000 bytes/second This example shows 96 Megabytes of data written in 6.6 seconds yielding the 14 Megabytes a second rate from a long browsing session Note that data was written over a couple of hours the time here refers to the actual the browser had to wait for the OS to complete the write operation. I would like these two lines from the logfile along with the OS and hardware spec of the system. E.g. "RISC OS 5 on Iyonix with FAT formatted hard drive" or "ROOL beta on Raspberry Pi 2 with FAT formatted SD card" If your cache is being effective you may notice that subsequent runs of the browser have quite varying write rates which can be caused by not writing enough data to get a sensible average. Unless the cache has written at least 250 kilobytes of data the results are not useful. For example if your cache has only written a hundred bytes of data the time it takes to do that will hugely affect the write rate. This is the cause of several "false positives" on the "write rate too slow" previously because a write of a hundred bytes that took a millisecond was considered as "too slow" instead of a rounding error! -- Regards Vincent http://www.kyllikki.org/
Re: Google
In message on 8 May 2015 Tony Moore wrote: > On 8 May 2015, Andrew Pinder wrote: > [snip] >> Which version of NetSurf are we talking about here? I'm on 3.4 (Dev >> CI #2771) on RO 5.22 and haven't seen any problems with Google. > Try tuning off JavaScript. Sorry, I wasnt paying enough attention to spot that aspect! Regards Andrew -- Andrew Pinder
Re: Google
In message Tony Moore wrote: > On 8 May 2015, Andrew Pinder wrote: > > [snip] > >> Which version of NetSurf are we talking about here? I'm on 3.4 (Dev >> CI #2771) on RO 5.22 and haven't seen any problems with Google. > > Try tuning off JavaScript. > > Tony With JS off, accessing the Google search page produces the problematic 'endless reloading' behaviour previously described; however, clicking on a previously hotlisted item works fine, even with JS off. So a temporary workaround might be to enable JS, hotlist all regularly-visited/needed sites, then disable JS and avoid using the search page entirely. [NetSurf 3.4 (Dev CI #2735)] -- George
Re: Google
On 8 May 2015, george greenfield wrote: [snip] > So a temporary workaround might be to enable JS, hotlist all > regularly-visited/needed sites, then disable JS and avoid using the > search page entirely. How is it possible to transfer an address, from the Google search page, to the NetSurf hotlist, without actually visiting the site? Tony
Re: Google
In message <3d8ea4c054.old_coaster@old_coaster.yahoo.co.uk> Tony Moore wrote: > On 8 May 2015, george greenfield > wrote: > > [snip] > >> So a temporary workaround might be to enable JS, hotlist all >> regularly-visited/needed sites, then disable JS and avoid using the >> search page entirely. > > How is it possible to transfer an address, from the Google search page, > to the NetSurf hotlist, without actually visiting the site? > > Tony > It's not possible. The procedure that seems to work here is: 1. Enable JS in Choices. 2. Open Google search page, enter desired site into Search field as usual. 3. Desired site loads - click Menu, select 'Utilities-Hotlist-Add to hotlist' and close Google search page. 4. Disable JS in Choices. 5. Click Adjust over NetSurf icon to open Hotlist, select desired site. Once a number of sites have been hotlisted they can be opened without requiring JS. And no, I don't understand how this works either -- George
Re: Google
In article <54c08f864b...@timil.com>, Tim Hill wrote: > In article <54c08c6513li...@torrens.org.uk>, Richard Torrens (lists) > wrote: > > Yesterday Google stopped working with Netsurf. > > Has anyone any cures or suggestions? > If you mean Google Search, in its stead I've been using DuckDuckGo with > RISC OS for some time. > https://duckduckgo.com/html/ Alternatively, if you prefer Google's search results, try https://startpage.com/ This uses Google but has its own frontend, which seems to work fine whether JavaScript is on or not. Regards, Frank
Re: Google
Another way of using Google is, for example http://www.google.co.uk/search?&q=Acacia Just double click on the link. Works from Pluto, StronEd and anything else which will launch a URL. Once on the search, you can delete the search term and type in another. So it seems to be only from the first page. Weird! -- Richard Torrens. http://www.Torrens.org.uk for genealogy, natural history, wild food, walks, cats and more!
Re: Google
On 8 May 2015, Richard Torrens (lists) wrote: > Another way of using Google is, for example > http://www.google.co.uk/search?&q=Acacia > Just double click on the link. Works from Pluto, StronEd and anything else > which will launch a URL. But that doesn't work on Netsurf :-( It just oscillates the same :-( > Once on the search, you can delete the search term and type in another. > So it seems to be only from the first page. Weird! -- Cheers Roger Atomic Software http://atomicsoftware.org.uk/ Isotope Info http://rogerarm.freeuk.com/ Wild Flowers http://wildflowerfinder.org.uk/ Bury Walkers http://burystrollers.org.uk/ Lonely pen tops. Where are their pen pals?
Re: Google
On 8 May 2015 Frank de Bruijn wrote: > In article <54c08f864b...@timil.com>, >Tim Hill wrote: >> In article <54c08c6513li...@torrens.org.uk>, Richard Torrens (lists) >> wrote: >>> Yesterday Google stopped working with Netsurf. >>> Has anyone any cures or suggestions? >> If you mean Google Search, in its stead I've been using DuckDuckGo with >> RISC OS for some time. >> https://duckduckgo.com/html/ > Alternatively, if you prefer Google's search results, try > https://startpage.com/ > This uses Google but has its own frontend, which seems to work fine > whether JavaScript is on or not. I use Google to provide a search facility on my own web site. Which of any of the other search engines or front ends allow you to create a form which specifies a particular site? -- Richard Porterhttp://www.minijem.plus.com/ Skype: minijem2 mailto:r...@minijem.plus.com I don't want a "user experience" - I just want stuff that works.
Re: Google
On 8 May, li...@torrens.org.uk typed: > Yesterday Google stopped working with Netsurf. > Has anyone any cures or suggestions? One suggestion would be to use https://startpage.com instead. It claims to: - be the world's most private search engine, - use Google in the background on your behalf anyway, and - not to record the user's IP address. We don't have to wait for Google to mend its ways. -- Bernard
Re: Google
In article <9118c3c054.r...@user.minijem.plus.com>, Richard Porter wrote: [Snip] > I use Google to provide a search facility on my own web site. Which of > any of the other search engines or front ends allow you to create a > form which specifies a particular site? https://duckduckgo.com/search_box -- www.timil.com web sites * multimedia * training
Re: Google
On 8 May 2015 Bernard Boase wrote: > On 8 May, li...@torrens.org.uk typed: >> Yesterday Google stopped working with Netsurf. >> Has anyone any cures or suggestions? > One suggestion would be to use https://startpage.com instead. > It claims to: > - be the world's most private search engine, > - use Google in the background on your behalf anyway, and > - not to record the user's IP address. > We don't have to wait for Google to mend its ways. But startpage gives you Google results. The trouble with Google is that it now redirects search results via itself so you either have to wait while it responds or you have to dig out the embedded url or type it in manually. Actually it looks as though sp does extract the embedded url for results but it takes a while to do it. Also have you tried clicking "Advanced"? I think you can supply a domain to search but it becomes unusable on NetSurf. -- Richard Porterhttp://www.minijem.plus.com/ Skype: minijem2 mailto:r...@minijem.plus.com I don't want a "user experience" - I just want stuff that works.
Re: Google
On 8 May 2015 as I do recall, Vincent Sanders wrote: > On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 01:26:32PM +0100, Richard Torrens (lists) wrote: > > Yesterday Google stopped working with Netsurf. > > > > Has anyone any cures or suggestions? > > > > It has been reported in the tracker as bug number 2314. Google have > changed the non javascript portion of their reply (the noscript entry) > to comtain completely broken html that simply causes the browser to > refresh and fail to work usefully. > > We cannot do anything about this in NetSurf itself and need Google to > unbreak their noscript, If you can get anyone there to listen that > would be good as I have been unable to find someone to contact. The only contact details I could find was tweeting @google - looks as if they do respond to individual mentions on Twitter, though it mostly seems to be people complaining about disappearing Google+ accounts. Perhaps we could start a Twitterstorm? :-) -- Harriet Bazley == Loyaulte me lie == Flying is the art of throwing yourself at the ground... and missing.
Re: Google
On 8 May 2015, Frank de Bruijn wrote: > In article <54c08f864b...@timil.com>, >Tim Hill wrote: >> In article <54c08c6513li...@torrens.org.uk>, Richard Torrens (lists) >> wrote: >>> Yesterday Google stopped working with Netsurf. >>> Has anyone any cures or suggestions? >> If you mean Google Search, in its stead I've been using DuckDuckGo with >> RISC OS for some time. >> https://duckduckgo.com/html/ > Alternatively, if you prefer Google's search results, try > https://startpage.com/ Which promptly gives: "error setting certificate setting verify locations" [at least on older Netserfs [which happen to work far faster, which is why I still use an old version]... > This uses Google but has its own frontend, which seems to work fine > whether JavaScript is on or not. > Regards, > Frank -- Cheers Roger If I were you I'd be me
