5 ms·

Any idea why the "slim" numbers are moving steadily in the wrong direction?

agapos 13y ago
Changes in browser engine and method/elaboration in memory measurement. And possibly a lot of regressions... Problem is, this does not convince Average Joe about the slimness of Fx. I asked them to set up a main chart using only the stable ones with the latest changes (allocation), but it was ignored. IMHO that would help them see the what the end user would see over the long course, and A. Joe would see what actually effects him (as he is unlikely to use dev channels). Edit: the charts also do not show the improvements in Garbage Collection (IGC in Fx16, upcoming ICC and GGC) and the memory management with add-os (Hueyfix in Fx15).
mccr8 13y ago
Tiny regressions are hard to track down, but over time they add up.
woogle 13y ago
I'm wondering too. FF13 seems the best with "slim" numbers.
aroch 13y ago
Some of it is the move from single to multi process/thread tab and rendering model. And if I'm remembering correctly a few of the new HTML5 elements added have caused significant (+20-30mb) leaks as they are, as of yet, unoptimized in the rendering code.
- tedmielczarek 13y ago
  There's no multiprocess content code enabled by default yet, so that's not it.
  - aroch 13y ago
    Not process but I could hsave sworn there are multithreaded processes enabled by default in Aurora, image processing for example.
    - sp332 13y ago
      It's enabled by default in version 30, which is Aurora right now.
tedmielczarek 13y ago
Controlling memory usage is a battle that requires constant vigilance, and it's hard. It's difficult to measure memory usage in a reliable, repeatable way such that we could use it to prevent regressions. Additionally, small regressions can add up over time, making it hard to pinpoint any one thing that could be backed out to improve memory usage.
nnethercote 13y ago
Partly it's just that the browser is getting more features. Things like WebRTC are a ton of code. More generally, AWSY is useful for identifying some regressions, but it's one specific, unrealistic workload. You can't use it to judge Firefox's overall memory consumption. For example, looking at AWSY you'd think Firefox 13 had the best memory consumption. But I guarantee you that Firefox 28 has better memory consumption. In particular, Firefox 28 has fewer bad cases where memory consumption spirals out of control, and those are the cases that really hurt performance and stability. Using 10 or 20% more memory at start-up, for example, isn't a big deal in comparison.
- nnethercote 13y ago
  Nonetheless, the increase isn't good. I filed https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=986323 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=986323 about this, and have started investigating.

Changes in browser engine and method/elaboration in memory measurement. And possibly a lot of regressions... Problem is, this does not convince Average Joe about the slimness of Fx. I asked them to set up a main chart using only the stable ones with the latest changes (allocation), but it was ignored. IMHO that would help them see the what the end user would see over the long course, and A. Joe would see what actually effects him (as he is unlikely to use dev channels). Edit: the charts also do not show the improvements in Garbage Collection (IGC in Fx16, upcoming ICC and GGC) and the memory management with add-os (Hueyfix in Fx15).

mccr8 13y ago

Tiny regressions are hard to track down, but over time they add up.

woogle 13y ago

I'm wondering too. FF13 seems the best with "slim" numbers.

aroch 13y ago

Some of it is the move from single to multi process/thread tab and rendering model. And if I'm remembering correctly a few of the new HTML5 elements added have caused significant (+20-30mb) leaks as they are, as of yet, unoptimized in the rendering code.

tedmielczarek 13y ago
There's no multiprocess content code enabled by default yet, so that's not it.
- aroch 13y ago
  Not process but I could hsave sworn there are multithreaded processes enabled by default in Aurora, image processing for example.
  - sp332 13y ago
    It's enabled by default in version 30, which is Aurora right now.

tedmielczarek 13y ago

Controlling memory usage is a battle that requires constant vigilance, and it's hard. It's difficult to measure memory usage in a reliable, repeatable way such that we could use it to prevent regressions. Additionally, small regressions can add up over time, making it hard to pinpoint any one thing that could be backed out to improve memory usage.

nnethercote 13y ago

Partly it's just that the browser is getting more features. Things like WebRTC are a ton of code. More generally, AWSY is useful for identifying some regressions, but it's one specific, unrealistic workload. You can't use it to judge Firefox's overall memory consumption. For example, looking at AWSY you'd think Firefox 13 had the best memory consumption. But I guarantee you that Firefox 28 has better memory consumption. In particular, Firefox 28 has fewer bad cases where memory consumption spirals out of control, and those are the cases that really hurt performance and stability. Using 10 or 20% more memory at start-up, for example, isn't a big deal in comparison.

nnethercote 13y ago
Nonetheless, the increase isn't good. I filed https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=986323 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=986323 about this, and have started investigating.