Where were you when Firefox was able to kill per tab process like a boss? Also the scroll is so smooth and resposive on long pages with lots of images and other crap. I'm testing Nightly x64; thinking of the relatively bad performance of 45 'stable' makes me not want to go back to that..
That technology is worthless to me.
http://www.erahm.org/2016/02/11/memory-usage-of-firefox-with-e10s-enabled/
Officially confirmed e10s will waste memory. It's not as wasteful as I had expected but even with just 8 content processes(could correspond to 8 tabs in the future) the memory usage doubled.
It's probably a fair trade for performance and security but we'll see.
>>53554595
Well, it improves the browser in many aspects. Responsiveness is one which I find very important. Crashig yeah, Firefox didn't crash in years for me.
>>53554684
I don't run a javascript benchmark in one tab and browse in the other so I had no responsiveness problems, might wanna try a SSD? It really helps.
>>53554708
I am using an Intel 530 series. Firefox 45 stable chokes badly on a long page (VK wall for instance) whereas the one with 310s enabled feels perfectly resposnive.
>>53554944
You've got a pretty awful SF-based SSD so I'm surprised you see choking
>>53554375
>Where were you when Firefox was able to kill per tab process like a boss?
On Chrome enjoying speeds and stability.
>>53554375
half a year ago it was supposed to be mainlined in 42. I am still waiting when this will leave alpha....
>>53555115
Wow that's sweet ram usage
>>53554375
>Where were you when Firefox was able to kill per tab process like a boss
Using a real browser like chrome.
>>53554682
Memory is actually released after closing tabs in e10s. I'm ok with increased usage as long as I can limit max content processes to a sane number like 4.
>>53554375
didn't chrome have this like a decade ago?
>>53555069
They're planning on enabling it soon on beta and stable if the user does not have any addons or accessibility features enabled. After the accessibility functionality is fixed I guess they'll have to go through the addons individually or wait for webextensions.
Is the 64bit edition worth the trouble?
>>53557489
Not on Windows.
>>53557489
I'm using it on windows and it's pretty shit. The memory usage is higher on average but aside from that it also occasionally hangs for a short time. I mainly just browse /g/ though so it doesn't really bother me enough to change back.
When did you grow up and start using Chrome?
>>53554375
>e10s appreciation
>>53554375
44 and 45 are CPU hog slow as shit
>>53554375
Can someone explain how it will work exactly?
The last time I tested nightly, it only spawned two processes. If one tab hung itself up I had to kill the content process but reload all tabs. Is this the idea or should it be like one process per tab?
>>53560032
To answer my own question:
>The goal of the current Electrolysis project ("e10s" for short) is to render and execute web related content in a single background 'content' process which communicates with the main Firefox process via various ipdl protocols. The two major advantages of this model are security and performance. Security improvements are accomplished through sandboxing, performance improvements are born out of the fact that multiple processes better leverage available client computing power.
Just two processes.
Is there more to read up on this? Do they want to change this in the future to even more processes?
>>53554682
> Memory leaks everywhere
Fuck off Mozilla.
>>53554682
firefox already uses fucking insane amounts of memory
E10 is has been disabled on the Nightly for a while now.; I dont know what they're doing. I just want to enable it.
>>53561356
>Just two processes.
>Do they want to change this in the future to even more processes?
I want to know more about this also.
>>53554375
>mfw freetards are getting excited about finally catching up with Chrome after the better part of a decade
>>53562856
more like.. mo-zhill-a
