6 ms·
I'm not sure how impressed I should feel about saving 45 MiB these days.
by bqmjjx0kac 9mo ago
I'm not sure how impressed I should feel about saving 45 MiB these days.
- mhitza 9mo ago45MiB is for the default adblock setup, and it scales with the more block lists you have enabled. I'll happily take performance improvements cause most products lack any efficiency care nowadays.
- jaybirdkwo 9mo ago[flagged]
- timeon 9mo ago> these days Are you referring to current RAM prices or bloat of numerous Electron apps?
- nomel 9mo agoA $130 Motorola smartphone has 8GB of RAM. This will save 0.5% RAM. It's fairly negligible on modern systems.
- formerly_proven 9mo ago130USD for 8GB RAM will be a good price for a bare DIMM in two weeks.
- renewiltord 9mo agoI can sell you 16 GB DIMMs today for less than 2x that so that you can profit.
- Retric 9mo agoThese days you’re getting 4GB at that price point and you’re losing memory to the OS thus user space memory is even more constrained.
- Bombthecat 9mo agoSmartphone producers already announced to cut ram this year... Just FYI
- devwastaken 9mo ago4GB of that taken by the system. more memory use with runtimes also means more cpu to track and free memory.
- moscoe 9mo agoNow multiply that across all apps/services/extensions/profiles and it adds up. This kind of lazy thinking is why today’s software is so bloated and slow.
- jokoon 9mo agoIt adds up but it would require to rewrite all software, which would be pretty costly. I agree with the sentiment but it's a bit too late now. The problem is with how software is designed around being cheap to write.
- winrid 9mo agoIt's so much cheaper to optimize now than before.
- morshu9001 9mo agoIt's just Brave browser, you don't multiply by the number of every kind of service
- mikkupikku 9mo agoWith your attitude towards improving one piece of software, it becomes every piece of software.
- deleted 9mo ago[deleted]
- array_key_first 9mo agoIt's more than that, because generally performance is also much worse if you're using a shit ton of memory. That's because CPUs are bottlenecked by cache. So more memory means cache has to be flushed more often, and there will be more misses, which can greatly impact performance.
- nwallin 9mo agoOK now do the math for someone who has 200 tabs open. Remember that basically all browsers these days spin up one process per tab.
- nomel 9mo agoModern browsers don't keep those 200 tabs in active memory. Hasn't been the case for over a decade.
- WhyNotHugo 9mo agoBut they do keep the active tab of each window in memory. Firefox even continues rendering all active tabs in all windows, even if for windows which are not visible. Not sure if this 45MB is per browser instance or per tab, but it’s the latter case, 10 windows would save 450MB. >10% on a lower-end device.
- astrange 9mo ago"Saving X% of RAM" isn't a thing because RAM is itself a cache of compressed swap space and/or mapped files. The lesson here is pointer-chasing data structures and trees are a lot more expensive than everyone and most programming languages like to pretend they are.
- jamesnorden 9mo agoThis kind of attitude is why everything is so bloated nowadays...
- allarm 9mo agoVery.
- infogulch 9mo agoAdblock data is accessed on every request; so this is 45 MiB of cpu cache.
- cozzyd 9mo agoI mean unless it's a linear search through the whole list, I doubt you save that much cache.
- hagbard_c 9mo agoVery, if only because you'd have said I'm not sure how impressed I should be about saving 4.5 MB these days not all that long ago. Remember when emacs was backronymised to 'eight megabytes and constantly swapping'? That was also not all that long ago. Now 8 megabytes is what some pissant JS library takes as part of some miserable npm package used to bellyflop an ad into your browser window.
- ensocode 9mo agoBe as impressed as you want but I think it is a very good sign that developers are taking care of it, and as this is a free to use product we can always be happy if someone boosts performance no matter how much
- db48x 9mo agoThat’s the wrong way to look at it. Improving the performance of a complex piece of software is not something you do in one fell swoop, or even in a dozen smaller steps. It’s a job of compounding many tiny single–digit percentages over years, and of carefully avoiding performance regressions.