downside to new firefox

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

UCJefe

Senior member
Jan 27, 2000
302
0
0
Originally posted by: Nothinman
The problem isn't only minimizing it. It's also just periods of inactivity when it's in the background and you're using other apps.

I'm running VMWare and other things on the same machine so there's no lack of memory contention and I have yet to see an instance where FF takes a very long time to respond.

From the discussion on the Bugzilla report, it appears the behavior is heavily tied to file I/O. Many other people are seeing the same issue without minimizing the browser. So to you for not having a problem on your system but I definitely had a huge one on mine. There are lot more details on the bugzilla page but there are a LOT of comments to wade through to get to the interesting one. They even took the word "minimized" out of the bug title for awhile but put it back to try and help avoid duplicate bug reports.
 

Nothinman

Elite Member
Sep 14, 2001
30,672
0
0
Worked in .8, doesn't in 1.0, MUST BE MY MACHINE

Not that it's not possibly a bug in FF, but there's obviously something on your maching that's triggering it.

From the discussion on the Bugzilla report, it appears the behavior is heavily tied to file I/O. Many other people are seeing the same issue without minimizing the browser

Well that's rather vague and I don't know if you've ever used VMWare but it's rather heavy on the file I/O as well.
 

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
56,541
10,167
126
Originally posted by: Nothinman
Worked in .8, doesn't in 1.0, MUST BE MY MACHINE
Not that it's not possibly a bug in FF, but there's obviously something on your maching that's triggering it.
I agree also. 0.8 was a memory hog, and slow. They've fixed the memory leak and made the browser a lot more "snappy" since then, especially with 1.0PR and later branch builds. It has to be some individual configuration issue going on.

However, the app-hang due to something getting b0rked during a download, is still possible. I think that I remember reading about some bugs in some of the code-paths where errors aren't fully handled correctly. Also, downloading in general with Moz/FF seems to take a much higher amount of CPU than it should. They've seemingly fixed the 100% CPU usage during download problem, but it's still a bit high. It can also depend on what extensions you have installed, and what theme you're using, and whether you have the download manager or download sidebar displayed or not.
 

CTho9305

Elite Member
Jul 26, 2000
9,214
1
81
Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
Originally posted by: CTho9305
The only GDI leak I know of is this one - see also duplicates here and here... that bug is fixed.

Possibly it's fixed on the Mozilla trunk nightly builds, but it is definately NOT FIXED in Firefox.
That bug was fixed in mozilla 1.4.x and 1.5.x. Firefox forked from 1.7, so it was fixed. However, there are apparently a few other GDI leaks, or bugs that appear to be GDI leaks but aren't.

I've been seeing the bug ever since Moz 1.2b, on everything Moz and FF-ish up until now. It's a serious design defect that limits my usability of the browser.
No, it's an implementation defect. Two different things. If it were a design defect, fixing it would require rewriting half of the browser.

One thing that I have noticed, with FF, is that after that number gets reached, if I continue to use it (carefully, by closing tabs/windows before opening other ones), somehow, after about a day, the GDI handle count drops back down to like 4000-odd, instead of 99xx, and then the problem doesn't manifest until it gets back up to 99xx, and then it usually crashed, but definately doesn't drop back down again.
If you open a new window and close it, it forces a garbage collect (at least in Mozilla). Does that also decrease it? If so, it's not a real leak.

Either way, though, there is no excuse for it to be using so many GDI handles period, their Win32 API usage, with respect to GDI, is simply malformed and mis-designed. No other app is that bad.
Read the source, find a patch, fix it. If it's as horrendously mis-designed as you imply, it should be easy. You can ask #developers on moznet where to get started - they'd be happy to help.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |