4 ms·

how is this a feature?

• dbaupp 13y ago
  Lower memory usage (I think).
  • zanny 13y ago
    You know, because the reason there are threads in the first place is that a single running process can share its global variables and heap space. When Chrome runs in multiple processes, it has to duplicate its global (mostly static) variable space each time. Albeit, that is certainly peanuts next to the v8 interpreters heap, the web page itself, loaded images, etc, but there is a reason few programs do the multi-process thing. Chrome doesn't really get a speedup from it, it gets a stability bump. If one tab crashes in Chrome a tab goes, if a tab in firefox goes it drops the whole browser process. As a development design pattern, if you are concerned with stability, you fork your threads into their own processes and prepare for them to go down in flames.
• Gmo 13y ago
  I have more than a 100 tabs open at once, it DOES add up.
  • artmageddon 13y ago
    So you're for or against Firefox using a multi-processor architecture? For me, FF becomes unbearably slow when I have about 15-20 tabs open.
    • dbaupp 13y ago
      For me, everything except FF is unbearably slow and memory-hog-y with more that that many tabs.
    • belorn 13y ago
      I'm not sure whats causing your 15-20 tabs to slow down the browser, but I managed at one time to build up over 256 tabs[1], and I can't say I noticed any performance drop over having single digit tabs. I haven't tested doing that in chrome, through I suspect the individual processes with no shared memory (sandboxing) would cause some trouble. [1]: Restore tabs on exit. If one do not clean up after a while, the tabs will just continue to increase.
    • pessimizer 13y ago
      That's got to be an addon problem. I can't remember the last time I had less than 15-20 tabs open. I have to get to 80-100 before I start feeling any misery.
      • artmageddon 13y ago
        I'll have to look into that. I run Ghostery, Adblock and Reddit enhancement suite, but that's it.