whats the deal with fire fox

[Noah Dain]

On 7/11/06, Dick Davies <rasputnik at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/07/06, Toby Kelsey <toby_kelsey at ntlworld.com> wrote:
> > Dick Davies wrote:
> >
> >  > That's not busy-waiting. It's doing things (rendering pages), hence
> >  > the slowdown.
> >
> > > Writing 'clearly busy-waiting' in a ticket doesn't make you any less
> > > wrong, and
> > > Using misleading phrases isn't going to get your problem fixed any sooner.
> >
> > So with a slower network connection it takes 20 times the amount of computation
> > to render the same page?
> > Explain that please or apologise.
>
> I freely apologize if I've sounded harsh, but I don't have to explain
> the behaviour.
> You're the one saying it's 'clearly busy waiting', so that's your job :)
>
> I don't see any indication (in the ubuntu or mozilla bug) that CPU load is
> high. That means it's very unlikely to be a busy wait.
>
>
> --
> Rasputin :: Jack of All Trades - Master of Nuns
> http://number9.hellooperator.net/
>
> --
> ubuntu-users mailing list
> ubuntu-users at lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
>

here's what I use to keep firefox's memory usage reasonable (at no
noticable performance penatlies):


"browser.sessionhistory.max_total_viewers" which by default is set to -1

If you set this preference to another value, e.g. 25, 25 pages will be
cached for every tab. You can set it to 0 to disable the feature, but
your page load performance will suffer.

    user_pref("browser.sessionhistory.max_total_viewers", 2);

limit the memory cache:
    user_pref("browser.cache.memory.capacity", 4096);


the resident set size rarely goes over 100MBs.  I only use java and
flash plugins (the acrobat reader plugin is horrible, in my
experience).


-- 
Noah Dain
"I don't want to make toys, I want to be a dentist!"