3 ms·
"It is also supposed to improve memory usage and stability" Did you do a comparison of memory against phantomJS?
by sparaker 9y ago
"It is also supposed to improve memory usage and stability"
Did you do a comparison of memory against phantomJS?
- lloeki 9y agoWords from PhantomJS ex-maintainer[0]: > I think people will switch to it, eventually. Chrome is faster and more stable than PhantomJS. And it doesn't eat memory like crazy. [0] https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/phantomjs/9aI5d-LDuNE/5Z3SMZrqAQAJ https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/phantomjs/9aI5d-LDuNE/...
- TimPetricola 9y agoIn fact no we didn't do any kind of benchmark. It's an assumption made of feedback from other users. As we knew we wanted to switch to headless Chrome anyway, we didn't investigate more into this part.
- royka118 9y agoJust this morning my team migrated from phantomJS to chrome headless for our Karma plus Jasmine tests. Did a bit of researching before the move and we found tests ran faster plus chrome used less memory than phantomJS. ~ 2000 specs compiling html and stuff
- rgbrgb 9y agoAny guess at how much faster the tests are running?