Certain web sites raise my cpu utilization to 99%.
The 2 websites that I visit very frequently are youtube and ebay.
I end up having to kill all the ebay and youtube tabs in order to regain some response for other interactive processes, and bring cpu utilization down to about 2 to 4 %.
So, why would these sites rob me of so much cpu computing power? How are they doing it? They even end up consuming network bandwidth, so much so, that other FF connections become extremely sluggish. The internet connection I connect to normally provides 6-MBites/s download speeds. When FF eats 99% of cpu, in most cases, I am not even playing any youtube videos.
On Sat, Aug 01, 2015 at 03:27:58PM -0600, jd1008 wrote:
Certain web sites raise my cpu utilization to 99%. The 2 websites that I visit very frequently are youtube and ebay. I end up having to kill all the ebay and youtube tabs in order to regain some response for other interactive processes, and bring cpu utilization down to about 2 to 4 %.
Do you have flash installed?
On 08/02/2015 06:37 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Sat, Aug 01, 2015 at 03:27:58PM -0600, jd1008 wrote:
Certain web sites raise my cpu utilization to 99%. The 2 websites that I visit very frequently are youtube and ebay. I end up having to kill all the ebay and youtube tabs in order to regain some response for other interactive processes, and bring cpu utilization down to about 2 to 4 %.
Do you have flash installed?
NOP!!! I use html5.
Since the Flash remote kill happened a few weeks ago by Mozilla and Google, I purged all Flash including manually disabling the built-in plugin in Chrome. But within days, I found that site have escalated their migration to HTML5 video and I've noticed two things. a.) these sites use more CPU than they did before with Flash. b.) they automatically play video, including ads in the margin, and I have found no way to disable this behavior such that I get the equivalent behavior I did with the Flash Block plugin.
As for the first problem, I'm gonna guess that HTML5 video codec is not yet, or as well, GPU optimized as Flash was. And the second, I don't know but it really has me in an incredibly foul mood because I'm actually wishing for Flash to come back just so I can block video. It even happens on my phone running Cyanogenmod, and it basically just chokes to death.
---- Chris Murphy
On 08/02/2015 08:53 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
Since the Flash remote kill happened a few weeks ago by Mozilla and Google, I purged all Flash including manually disabling the built-in plugin in Chrome. But within days, I found that site have escalated their migration to HTML5 video and I've noticed two things. a.) these sites use more CPU than they did before with Flash. b.) they automatically play video, including ads in the margin, and I have found no way to disable this behavior such that I get the equivalent behavior I did with the Flash Block plugin.
As for the first problem, I'm gonna guess that HTML5 video codec is not yet, or as well, GPU optimized as Flash was. And the second, I don't know but it really has me in an incredibly foul mood because I'm actually wishing for Flash to come back just so I can block video. It even happens on my phone running Cyanogenmod, and it basically just chokes to death.
Chris Murphy
My suspicion is that it is not html5. I say this because, even though I was cruising youtube, I was not playing anything. Furthermore, I used an addon to block all ads, so I had no animated ads, nor any ads on the pages. So, I am puzzled about what is eating the cpu bandwidth. I wish there were away for the user to view all the JS directives that FF receives from the web sites so we can know exactly what it is doing. We need to able to exercise total control over what the browser is doing on behalf the websites we visit.
When I killed FF, cpu usage went down to 2%.
On 08/03/15 23:19, jd1008 wrote:
My suspicion is that it is not html5. I say this because, even though I was cruising youtube, I was not playing anything. Furthermore, I used an addon to block all ads, so I had no animated ads, nor any ads on the pages. So, I am puzzled about what is eating the cpu bandwidth. I wish there were away for the user to view all the JS directives that FF receives from the web sites so we can know exactly what it is doing. We need to able to exercise total control over what the browser is doing on behalf the websites we visit.
When I killed FF, cpu usage went down to 2%.
Looking back at the archives you seem to have more problems than you can shake a stick at.
I tried very hard today to get FF into the condition you're reporting and could not. I went on eBay, YouTube, CNN, mlb.com, NYtimes and a whole bunch of other places. I had 8 tabs open including Facebook and G+. No issues. But, I also don't have any addons or extensions to firefox since that isn't my browser of choice.
In this post you've indicated perceived problems with CPU usage as well as network bandwidth.
For the network bandwidth, you can always use wireshark to see what may be hogging the network.
For the cpu issue, maybe gdb offers some clues.
On 08/03/2015 09:51 AM, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 08/03/15 23:19, jd1008 wrote:
My suspicion is that it is not html5. I say this because, even though I was cruising youtube, I was not playing anything. Furthermore, I used an addon to block all ads, so I had no animated ads, nor any ads on the pages. So, I am puzzled about what is eating the cpu bandwidth. I wish there were away for the user to view all the JS directives that FF receives from the web sites so we can know exactly what it is doing. We need to able to exercise total control over what the browser is doing on behalf the websites we visit.
When I killed FF, cpu usage went down to 2%.
Looking back at the archives you seem to have more problems than you can shake a stick at.
I tried very hard today to get FF into the condition you're reporting and could not. I went on eBay, YouTube, CNN, mlb.com, NYtimes and a whole bunch of other places. I had 8 tabs open including Facebook and G+. No issues. But, I also don't have any addons or extensions to firefox since that isn't my browser of choice.
In this post you've indicated perceived problems with CPU usage as well as network bandwidth.
For the network bandwidth, you can always use wireshark to see what may be hogging the network.
For the cpu issue, maybe gdb offers some clues.
I did not mention network as that does not seem to be the problem. Just the cpu utilization by FF according to output of top.
gdb shows stacks. How can one use gdb to find just exactly what is eating up so much cpu?
2015-08-03 17:59 GMT+02:00, jd1008 jd1008@gmail.com:
gdb shows stacks. How can one use gdb to find just exactly what is eating up so much cpu?
You could try strace. Not that it proved very useful for me (for the same problem).
2015-08-03 17:51 GMT+02:00, Ed Greshko ed.greshko@greshko.com:
On 08/03/15 23:19, jd1008 wrote:
My suspicion is that it is not html5. I say this because, even though I was cruising youtube, I was not playing anything. Furthermore, I used an addon to block all ads, so I had no animated ads, nor any ads on the pages. So, I am puzzled about what is eating the cpu bandwidth. I wish there were away for the user to view all the JS directives that FF receives from the web sites so we can know exactly what it is doing. We need to able to exercise total control over what the browser is doing on behalf the websites we visit.
When I killed FF, cpu usage went down to 2%.
Looking back at the archives you seem to have more problems than you can shake a stick at.
I tried very hard today to get FF into the condition you're reporting and could not. I went on eBay, YouTube, CNN, mlb.com, NYtimes and a whole bunch of other places. I had 8 tabs open including Facebook and G+. No issues. But, I also don't have any addons or extensions to firefox since that isn't my browser of choice.
It's not easily reproducible, but it does happen a lot for me, too. Even with JS switched off and Flash killed.
On 08/03/2015 10:04 AM, Andras Simon wrote:
2015-08-03 17:51 GMT+02:00, Ed Greshko ed.greshko@greshko.com:
On 08/03/15 23:19, jd1008 wrote:
My suspicion is that it is not html5. I say this because, even though I was cruising youtube, I was not playing anything. Furthermore, I used an addon to block all ads, so I had no animated ads, nor any ads on the pages. So, I am puzzled about what is eating the cpu bandwidth. I wish there were away for the user to view all the JS directives that FF receives from the web sites so we can know exactly what it is doing. We need to able to exercise total control over what the browser is doing on behalf the websites we visit.
When I killed FF, cpu usage went down to 2%.
Looking back at the archives you seem to have more problems than you can shake a stick at.
I tried very hard today to get FF into the condition you're reporting and could not. I went on eBay, YouTube, CNN, mlb.com, NYtimes and a whole bunch of other places. I had 8 tabs open including Facebook and G+. No issues. But, I also don't have any addons or extensions to firefox since that isn't my browser of choice.
It's not easily reproducible, but it does happen a lot for me, too. Even with JS switched off and Flash killed.
Herr Greshko is the only one Not having this issue ?? :) :) :) (LOL)
On 08/03/15 23:59, jd1008 wrote:
On 08/03/2015 09:51 AM, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 08/03/15 23:19, jd1008 wrote:
My suspicion is that it is not html5. I say this because, even though I was cruising youtube, I was not playing anything. Furthermore, I used an addon to block all ads, so I had no animated ads, nor any ads on the pages. So, I am puzzled about what is eating the cpu bandwidth. I wish there were away for the user to view all the JS directives that FF receives from the web sites so we can know exactly what it is doing. We need to able to exercise total control over what the browser is doing on behalf the websites we visit.
When I killed FF, cpu usage went down to 2%.
Looking back at the archives you seem to have more problems than you can shake a stick at.
I tried very hard today to get FF into the condition you're reporting and could not. I went on eBay, YouTube, CNN, mlb.com, NYtimes and a whole bunch of other places. I had 8 tabs open including Facebook and G+. No issues. But, I also don't have any addons or extensions to firefox since that isn't my browser of choice.
In this post you've indicated perceived problems with CPU usage as well as network bandwidth.
For the network bandwidth, you can always use wireshark to see what may be hogging the network.
For the cpu issue, maybe gdb offers some clues.
I did not mention network as that does not seem to be the problem. Just the cpu utilization by FF according to output of top.
Yes, you did...
"They even end up consuming network bandwidth, so much so, that other FF connections become extremely sluggish."
You don't recall typing that?
On 08/04/15 00:08, jd1008 wrote:
Herr Greshko is the only one Not having this issue ?? :) :) :) (LOL)
I didn't say you're not having a problem. I just said you have many problems and this is one of the many that I'm not able to reproduce.
On 3 August 2015 at 17:51, Ed Greshko ed.greshko@greshko.com wrote:
I tried very hard today to get FF into the condition you're reporting and could not. I went on eBay, YouTube, CNN, mlb.com, NYtimes and a whole bunch of other places. I had 8 tabs open including Facebook and G+. No issues. But, I also don't have any addons or extensions to firefox since that isn't my browser of choice.
My FF session usually has 100+ tabs open. Sometimes I do get issues, but with sites with lots of scripts doing "smart" things. FF usually prompts in such cases to stop the script.
On 08/04/15 04:21, Suvayu Ali wrote:
On 3 August 2015 at 17:51, Ed Greshko ed.greshko@greshko.com wrote:
I tried very hard today to get FF into the condition you're reporting and could not. I went on eBay, YouTube, CNN, mlb.com, NYtimes and a whole bunch of other places. I had 8 tabs open including Facebook and G+. No issues. But, I also don't have any addons or extensions to firefox since that isn't my browser of choice.
My FF session usually has 100+ tabs open. Sometimes I do get issues, but with sites with lots of scripts doing "smart" things. FF usually prompts in such cases to stop the script.
At 100+ tabs I'm not surprised there would be issues.
On 08/03/15 10:19, jd1008 wrote: <<>>
My suspicion is that it is not html5.
I say this because, even though I was cruising youtube, I was not playing anything. Furthermore, I used an addon to block all ads, so I had no animated ads, nor any ads on the pages. So, I am puzzled about what is eating the cpu bandwidth. I wish there were away for the user to view all the JS directives that FF receives from the web sites so we can know exactly what it is doing. We need to able to exercise total control over what the browser is doing on behalf the websites we visit.
the wonders/whats/whys of programs are, i believe, in many minds is "!WTF! is happening now?".
i will give some credit to the firefox dev's in that they did foresee need to know 'wtf' and some of access is via "Tools" in 'main menu' bar.
they did think to include, at one time, what is called "error console" and "browser console".
"error console" is accessed by pressing <alt+t>,<alt+w>,<alt+c>. along top of "error console" window are buttons for:
[All] [Errors] [Warnings] [Messages] [Clear]
where the active button with be enclosed.
if not available for your version, which you did not mention, for more info see;
http://kb.mozillazine.org/Special:Search?ns0=1&ns4=1&ns5=1&ns8=1...
and
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Error_Console
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Tools/Web_Console
"browser console" is accessed by pressing <alt+t>,<alt+w>,<alt+b>, or, <ctrl+shift+j>. along top of "browser console" window are buttons for:
[Net] [CSS] [JS] [Security] [Logging] [Clear]
where the active will be clear, inactive is grayed. each of the buttons has a color which relates to color used in the log table.
again, availability depends on version. for information, see;
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Tools/Browser_Console
to see if you have some add-on causing loading, in 'main menu' bar, try;
Help > Restart with Add-ons Disabled...
if loading drops, you have an add-on causing problem and you find which one by restarting firefox with 1/2 add-ons enabled. if ok, enable 1/2 of remaining, restart, then repeating '1/2 enable' each time until add-on is found.
On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 05:10:45AM +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 08/04/15 04:21, Suvayu Ali wrote:
On 3 August 2015 at 17:51, Ed Greshko ed.greshko@greshko.com wrote:
I tried very hard today to get FF into the condition you're reporting and could not. I went on eBay, YouTube, CNN, mlb.com, NYtimes and a whole bunch of other places. I had 8 tabs open including Facebook and G+. No issues. But, I also don't have any addons or extensions to firefox since that isn't my browser of choice.
My FF session usually has 100+ tabs open. Sometimes I do get issues, but with sites with lots of scripts doing "smart" things. FF usually prompts in such cases to stop the script.
At 100+ tabs I'm not surprised there would be issues.
Actually I'm surprised that with so many tabs there are so few issues!
On 08/04/15 07:45, Suvayu Ali wrote:
On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 05:10:45AM +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 08/04/15 04:21, Suvayu Ali wrote:
On 3 August 2015 at 17:51, Ed Greshko ed.greshko@greshko.com wrote:
I tried very hard today to get FF into the condition you're reporting and could not. I went on eBay, YouTube, CNN, mlb.com, NYtimes and a whole bunch of other places. I had 8 tabs open including Facebook and G+. No issues. But, I also don't have any addons or extensions to firefox since that isn't my browser of choice.
My FF session usually has 100+ tabs open. Sometimes I do get issues, but with sites with lots of scripts doing "smart" things. FF usually prompts in such cases to stop the script.
At 100+ tabs I'm not surprised there would be issues.
Actually I'm surprised that with so many tabs there are so few issues!
Yeah... I have a system with a 4 core i5 and 8GB of RAM.
For the fun of it I fired up FF and opened up 50 tabs. I purposely picked sites which have lots of adverts which get updated. 10 of those tabs were of a weather site which updates the data very frequently.
FWIW, I also had chrome running with 3 windows. The main had 10 tabs open, a window in full screen mode watching a baseball game from mlb.com, and a window running the Slingbox app and playing TV from the US.
FF would generally run at 41~53%, sometimes as low as 27%. However, it would spike to 120% at times when those 10 weather tabs decided they'd like to refresh around the same time. Of course I could drive it higher by clicking on "reload all tabs".
The only "issue" I saw is that playing a video from youtube is choppy even though you can see from the progress bar that the video itself has been totally downloaded. I suspect this is due to the single process threaded nature of the FF implementation.
The videos in the Chrome windows were running and rendering smoothly and in HD.
In summary, pretty much what I would expect.
On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 10:32:47AM +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
For the fun of it I fired up FF and opened up 50 tabs. I purposely picked sites which have lots of adverts which get updated. 10 of those tabs were of a weather site which updates the data very frequently.
Btw, FF nightly now has a tracking protection feature that does the "no tracking" job of many of the privacy add-ons like Privacy Badger, Ghostery, Disconnect Me, etc. They even have a menu option, both are still hidden inside about:config though.
The only "issue" I saw is that playing a video from youtube is choppy even though you can see from the progress bar that the video itself has been totally downloaded. I suspect this is due to the single process threaded nature of the FF implementation.
Again, FF now has something called electrolysis (e10s), which makes it multi-threaded. Not sure which versions of FF has the feature. I find it is quite effective, but maybe a bit buggy.
Cheers,
On 08/04/15 15:38, Suvayu Ali wrote:
On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 10:32:47AM +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
For the fun of it I fired up FF and opened up 50 tabs. I purposely picked sites which have lots of adverts which get updated. 10 of those tabs were of a weather site which updates the data very frequently.
Btw, FF nightly now has a tracking protection feature that does the "no tracking" job of many of the privacy add-ons like Privacy Badger, Ghostery, Disconnect Me, etc. They even have a menu option, both are still hidden inside about:config though.
Not sure what relevance that has to CPU usage.
The only "issue" I saw is that playing a video from youtube is choppy even though you can see from the progress bar that the video itself has been totally downloaded. I suspect this is due to the single process threaded nature of the FF implementation.
Again, FF now has something called electrolysis (e10s), which makes it multi-threaded. Not sure which versions of FF has the feature. I find it is quite effective, but maybe a bit buggy.
Well, since Fedora doesn't distribute "nightly" and that e10s option doesn't exist on the fedora released version I don't know what relevance it has to the discussion.
On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 03:54:37PM +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 08/04/15 15:38, Suvayu Ali wrote:
On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 10:32:47AM +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
For the fun of it I fired up FF and opened up 50 tabs. I purposely picked sites which have lots of adverts which get updated. 10 of those tabs were of a weather site which updates the data very frequently.
Btw, FF nightly now has a tracking protection feature that does the "no tracking" job of many of the privacy add-ons like Privacy Badger, Ghostery, Disconnect Me, etc. They even have a menu option, both are still hidden inside about:config though.
Not sure what relevance that has to CPU usage.
As I understood the topic was unusual CPU loads. Since you mentioned adverts (considering they are often responsible for strange CPU loads), I thought I mention a feature FF will have in the future. Tests by devs suggest the feature improves on CPU load and page load times significantly.
The only "issue" I saw is that playing a video from youtube is choppy even though you can see from the progress bar that the video itself has been totally downloaded. I suspect this is due to the single process threaded nature of the FF implementation.
Again, FF now has something called electrolysis (e10s), which makes it multi-threaded. Not sure which versions of FF has the feature. I find it is quite effective, but maybe a bit buggy.
Well, since Fedora doesn't distribute "nightly" and that e10s option doesn't exist on the fedora released version I don't know what relevance it has to the discussion.
Again, I thought this was relevant for a discussion of CPU loads, specially after you pointed out the single-threaded nature of FF. I just didn't know if the Fedora supplied version already has it.
On 08/04/15 16:31, Suvayu Ali wrote:
On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 03:54:37PM +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 08/04/15 15:38, Suvayu Ali wrote:
On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 10:32:47AM +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
For the fun of it I fired up FF and opened up 50 tabs. I purposely picked sites which have lots of adverts which get updated. 10 of those tabs were of a weather site which updates the data very frequently.
Btw, FF nightly now has a tracking protection feature that does the "no tracking" job of many of the privacy add-ons like Privacy Badger, Ghostery, Disconnect Me, etc. They even have a menu option, both are still hidden inside about:config though.
Not sure what relevance that has to CPU usage.
As I understood the topic was unusual CPU loads. Since you mentioned adverts (considering they are often responsible for strange CPU loads), I thought I mention a feature FF will have in the future. Tests by devs suggest the feature improves on CPU load and page load times significantly.
I see....
The only "issue" I saw is that playing a video from youtube is choppy even though you can see from the progress bar that the video itself has been totally downloaded. I suspect this is due to the single process threaded nature of the FF implementation.
Again, FF now has something called electrolysis (e10s), which makes it multi-threaded. Not sure which versions of FF has the feature. I find it is quite effective, but maybe a bit buggy.
Well, since Fedora doesn't distribute "nightly" and that e10s option doesn't exist on the fedora released version I don't know what relevance it has to the discussion.
Again, I thought this was relevant for a discussion of CPU loads, specially after you pointed out the single-threaded nature of FF. I just didn't know if the Fedora supplied version already has it.
I see. Well, looking at the WiKi (https://wiki.mozilla.org/Electrolysis/Roadmap) for this it seems it is nowhere near being ready for prime time and certainly not something Fedora releases.
What I was addressing in my earlier response was my current experience with FF in its present form as released by Fedora sans any extensions. Personally I'm not looking for how future improvements may help since I don't expect I'll switching back to using it. :-) :-)
On 08/03/2015 10:21 PM, Suvayu Ali wrote:
On 3 August 2015 at 17:51, Ed Greshko ed.greshko@greshko.com wrote:
I tried very hard today to get FF into the condition you're reporting and could not. I went on eBay, YouTube, CNN, mlb.com, NYtimes and a whole bunch of other places. I had 8 tabs open including Facebook and G+. No issues. But, I also don't have any addons or extensions to firefox since that isn't my browser of choice.
My FF session usually has 100+ tabs open. Sometimes I do get issues, but with sites with lots of scripts doing "smart" things. FF usually prompts in such cases to stop the script.
I sometimes go beyond 300 tabs, approaching 500.
This abandoned extension is incredibly useful:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/61ovoc4hzgtm0qf/Suspend-background-tabs-master.xpi...
Javascript is disabled for all background tabs, so they won't use CPU time anymore.
On 08/04/15 18:40, Roberto Ragusa wrote:
I sometimes go beyond 300 tabs, approaching 500.
I guess I don't quite understand the usefulness of having so many open tabs. Feels like a cluttered desk to me. Maybe it has something to do with my short term memory not being what it used to be. Now, where are my keys? :-)
On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 12:40:04PM +0200, Roberto Ragusa wrote:
On 08/03/2015 10:21 PM, Suvayu Ali wrote:
On 3 August 2015 at 17:51, Ed Greshko ed.greshko@greshko.com wrote:
I tried very hard today to get FF into the condition you're reporting and could not. I went on eBay, YouTube, CNN, mlb.com, NYtimes and a whole bunch of other places. I had 8 tabs open including Facebook and G+. No issues. But, I also don't have any addons or extensions to firefox since that isn't my browser of choice.
My FF session usually has 100+ tabs open. Sometimes I do get issues, but with sites with lots of scripts doing "smart" things. FF usually prompts in such cases to stop the script.
I sometimes go beyond 300 tabs, approaching 500.
This abandoned extension is incredibly useful:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/61ovoc4hzgtm0qf/Suspend-background-tabs-master.xpi...
Javascript is disabled for all background tabs, so they won't use CPU time anymore.
This looks interesting. I'll try it out.
Cheers,
On Tue, 2015-08-04 at 12:40 +0200, Roberto Ragusa wrote:
This abandoned extension is incredibly useful:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/61ovoc4hzgtm0qf/Suspend-background-tabs-master.xpi...
Javascript is disabled for all background tabs, so they won't use CPU time anymore.
I always wondered why that sort of thing wasn't the default. Other than listening to some music being played from a backgrounded tab, you can't do much with a web page that you're not currently looking at. It doesn't seem practical to let it suck up your CPU while you're trying to do other things.
On Thu, 2015-08-27 at 22:54 +0930, Tim wrote:
On Tue, 2015-08-04 at 12:40 +0200, Roberto Ragusa wrote:
This abandoned extension is incredibly useful:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/61ovoc4hzgtm0qf/Suspend-background-tabs-m aster.xpi?dl=0
Javascript is disabled for all background tabs, so they won't use CPU time anymore.
I always wondered why that sort of thing wasn't the default. Other than listening to some music being played from a backgrounded tab, you can't do much with a web page that you're not currently looking at. It doesn't seem practical to let it suck up your CPU while you're trying to do other things.
Currently Firefox tabs are not separate processes. Mozilla has been working on it for a while now but it will mean a change to the add-ons system. See http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/08/mozil la-sets-plan-to-dump-firefox-add-ons-move-to-chrome-like-extensions/
poc
On 08/27/2015 10:11 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Thu, 2015-08-27 at 22:54 +0930, Tim wrote:
On Tue, 2015-08-04 at 12:40 +0200, Roberto Ragusa wrote:
This abandoned extension is incredibly useful:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/61ovoc4hzgtm0qf/Suspend-background-tabs-m aster.xpi?dl=0
Javascript is disabled for all background tabs, so they won't use CPU time anymore.
I always wondered why that sort of thing wasn't the default. Other than listening to some music being played from a backgrounded tab, you can't do much with a web page that you're not currently looking at. It doesn't seem practical to let it suck up your CPU while you're trying to do other things.
Currently Firefox tabs are not separate processes. Mozilla has been working on it for a while now but it will mean a change to the add-ons system. See http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/08/mozil la-sets-plan-to-dump-firefox-add-ons-move-to-chrome-like-extensions/
poc
Why not use multithreading to take care of all tabs? That way we could actually find out which FF thread(s) is (are) sucking up so much cpu?
2015-08-27 18:11 GMT+02:00, Patrick O'Callaghan pocallaghan@gmail.com:
On Thu, 2015-08-27 at 22:54 +0930, Tim wrote:
On Tue, 2015-08-04 at 12:40 +0200, Roberto Ragusa wrote:
This abandoned extension is incredibly useful:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/61ovoc4hzgtm0qf/Suspend-background-tabs-m aster.xpi?dl=0
Javascript is disabled for all background tabs, so they won't use CPU time anymore.
I always wondered why that sort of thing wasn't the default. Other than listening to some music being played from a backgrounded tab, you can't do much with a web page that you're not currently looking at. It doesn't seem practical to let it suck up your CPU while you're trying to do other things.
Currently Firefox tabs are not separate processes. Mozilla has been working on it for a while now but it will mean a change to the add-ons system. See http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/08/mozil la-sets-plan-to-dump-firefox-add-ons-move-to-chrome-like-extensions/
I don't think it follows from this that javascript running in background tabs couldn't be suspended. Actually, the existence of the extension Roberto mentioned above seems to prove that they can.
Andras
On Thu, 2015-08-27 at 20:12 +0200, Andras Simon wrote:
2015-08-27 18:11 GMT+02:00, Patrick O'Callaghan < pocallaghan@gmail.com>:
On Thu, 2015-08-27 at 22:54 +0930, Tim wrote:
On Tue, 2015-08-04 at 12:40 +0200, Roberto Ragusa wrote:
This abandoned extension is incredibly useful:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/61ovoc4hzgtm0qf/Suspend-background-ta bs-m aster.xpi?dl=0
Javascript is disabled for all background tabs, so they won't use CPU time anymore.
I always wondered why that sort of thing wasn't the default. Other than listening to some music being played from a backgrounded tab, you can't do much with a web page that you're not currently looking at. It doesn't seem practical to let it suck up your CPU while you're trying to do other things.
Currently Firefox tabs are not separate processes. Mozilla has been working on it for a while now but it will mean a change to the add -ons system. See http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/08/mozil la-sets-plan-to-dump-firefox-add-ons-move-to-chrome-like -extensions/
I don't think it follows from this that javascript running in background tabs couldn't be suspended. Actually, the existence of the extension Roberto mentioned above seems to prove that they can.
No doubt that is true, but my point is that Mozilla are working on a more comprehensive change so I doubt they'll bother with an interim solution such as this. Especially as they could have done it at any time in the past.
poc
2015-08-27 21:38 GMT+02:00, Patrick O'Callaghan pocallaghan@gmail.com:
Currently Firefox tabs are not separate processes. Mozilla has been working on it for a while now but it will mean a change to the add -ons system. See http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/08/mozil la-sets-plan-to-dump-firefox-add-ons-move-to-chrome-like -extensions/
I don't think it follows from this that javascript running in background tabs couldn't be suspended. Actually, the existence of the extension Roberto mentioned above seems to prove that they can.
No doubt that is true, but my point is that Mozilla are working on a more comprehensive change so I doubt they'll bother with an interim solution such as this. Especially as they could have done it at any time in the past.
Ah, OK, I see!
Andras
-
Andras Simon -
Chris Murphy -
Ed Greshko -
g -
JD -
Matthew Miller -
Patrick O'Callaghan -
Roberto Ragusa -
Suvayu Ali -
Tim