4 ms·

Most browsers use this amount of memory. Between JITs, lots of overlapping images, and dynamic content, webpages do actually take a lot of memory to display. In

Most browsers use this amount of memory. Between JITs, lots of overlapping images, and dynamic content, webpages do actually take a lot of memory to display. In "about:memory", thee is a "Minimize Memory" option, which can work quite well. Personally I have about 70 tabs open, with 1.6GB of memory. This is quite good compared to other browsers I've used.

nnethercote 12y ago
Thanks for your realism and understanding! It's nice to hear something other than complaints every once in a while. The things you mentioned all contribute, but most of all, people greatly underestimate the amount of memory required to run JavaScript code. Not so much the JITs, which don't actually use that much, but just all the objects and arrays and strings and closures. Like all high-level, dynamically-typed, garbage collected languages, it uses a fair amount of memory. And the amount of JS code running on many sites is enormous. But people always ask "why is the browser using so much memory", not "why is this site using so much memory". Maybe because per-site memory measurements aren't prominent enough.
- annnnd 12y ago
  Sorry if it sounded like I am complaining, the fact that I still use FF even though it cripples my VM from time to time shows that I am a fan. ;) It is a bit annoying though. > But people always ask "why is the browser using so much memory", not "why is this site using so much memory". Maybe because per-site memory measurements aren't prominent enough. Do you mean to say these measurements exist? I couldn't find them in about:memory (per-site, that is). That would be an awesome feature! I could easily kill the tabs which are eating up my RAM if only I knew which ones were doing it. Better yet, I could see if I am being reckless with memory in my own webapps. The issue I am having is not that browser uses too much RAM. The issue is that I (as a user) am not aware of high memory usage until it is too late. Even worse, I have no clue what caused this state and have no option to learn from previous "mistakes" (if some site is using too much RAM, I could avoid it or close it when not needed anymore). So yes, per-site (per-tab?) memory usage indicators would solve my issue completely. Thanks again for taking your time to answer, and keep up the good work! You have a great product there.
  - keeperofdakeys 12y ago
    In fact, "about:memory" does show separate memory allocations per tab. Look under "explicit", "window", and you'll find a thing named "tiny", this contains most of the windows (it's a tree, click to expand). There are also a number of tabs not in the tiny branch, which are considered a little too big.
    - annnnd 12y ago
      Thanks, but if I understand correctly, not all tabs are there and this is not their total memory usage. If this is so, then this is not what I meant. I meant a single indicator of tab memory usage in a similar way PSS is calculated [1]. That is: all the memory resources this tab uses (including JS) plus appropriate share of the shared resources. From user's point of view I don't care HOW the page/tab uses my memory - I just want to know how much of it it used. [1] http://lwn.net/Articles/230975/ http://lwn.net/Articles/230975/
      - nnethercote 12y ago
        All the tabs are there. Look at the "top(...)" entries just below "window-objects". Most of the per-tab memory is correctly reported there. Images are the main thing that isn't reported on a per-tab basis.

nnethercote 12y ago

Thanks for your realism and understanding! It's nice to hear something other than complaints every once in a while. The things you mentioned all contribute, but most of all, people greatly underestimate the amount of memory required to run JavaScript code. Not so much the JITs, which don't actually use that much, but just all the objects and arrays and strings and closures. Like all high-level, dynamically-typed, garbage collected languages, it uses a fair amount of memory. And the amount of JS code running on many sites is enormous. But people always ask "why is the browser using so much memory", not "why is this site using so much memory". Maybe because per-site memory measurements aren't prominent enough.

annnnd 12y ago
Sorry if it sounded like I am complaining, the fact that I still use FF even though it cripples my VM from time to time shows that I am a fan. ;) It is a bit annoying though. > But people always ask "why is the browser using so much memory", not "why is this site using so much memory". Maybe because per-site memory measurements aren't prominent enough. Do you mean to say these measurements exist? I couldn't find them in about:memory (per-site, that is). That would be an awesome feature! I could easily kill the tabs which are eating up my RAM if only I knew which ones were doing it. Better yet, I could see if I am being reckless with memory in my own webapps. The issue I am having is not that browser uses too much RAM. The issue is that I (as a user) am not aware of high memory usage until it is too late. Even worse, I have no clue what caused this state and have no option to learn from previous "mistakes" (if some site is using too much RAM, I could avoid it or close it when not needed anymore). So yes, per-site (per-tab?) memory usage indicators would solve my issue completely. Thanks again for taking your time to answer, and keep up the good work! You have a great product there.
- keeperofdakeys 12y ago
  In fact, "about:memory" does show separate memory allocations per tab. Look under "explicit", "window", and you'll find a thing named "tiny", this contains most of the windows (it's a tree, click to expand). There are also a number of tabs not in the tiny branch, which are considered a little too big.
  - annnnd 12y ago
    Thanks, but if I understand correctly, not all tabs are there and this is not their total memory usage. If this is so, then this is not what I meant. I meant a single indicator of tab memory usage in a similar way PSS is calculated [1]. That is: all the memory resources this tab uses (including JS) plus appropriate share of the shared resources. From user's point of view I don't care HOW the page/tab uses my memory - I just want to know how much of it it used. [1] http://lwn.net/Articles/230975/ http://lwn.net/Articles/230975/
    - nnethercote 12y ago
      All the tabs are there. Look at the "top(...)" entries just below "window-objects". Most of the per-tab memory is correctly reported there. Images are the main thing that isn't reported on a per-tab basis.