Guest wsxedcrfv Posted June 5, 2010 Share Posted June 5, 2010 I'm asking a question about Firefox 2.0.0.20 here because the only place I'm likely to get an answer about that version is among Windows 98 users.I've noticed that as I download more files on this system, it takes longer and longer for FF to initiate the file-transfer process and begin the download. Is there a known performance issue with file downloading on Firefox 2.0.0.20 as the size of it's internal download list grows? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sp193 Posted June 6, 2010 Share Posted June 6, 2010 I'm asking a question about Firefox 2.0.0.20 here because the only place I'm likely to get an answer about that version is among Windows 98 users.I've noticed that as I download more files on this system, it takes longer and longer for FF to initiate the file-transfer process and begin the download. Is there a known performance issue with file downloading on Firefox 2.0.0.20 as the size of it's internal download list grows?Unfortunately, yes. This is true, even on newer OSes (I use Windows XP x64 and Windows 7 too).Somehow, this "bug" is still present, even in Firefox 3.6 (At least I still think it is). It's actually not Firefox taking a longer time to initiate a download, but it seems to be actually Firefox slowing down (if you have enough completed/progressing downloads in this list, you'll see everything running slowly).You can achieve this, even if your downloads are small (But huge in number). The only workaround to this is to periodically clear any completed downloads from the download list.I first noticed this when I was mass-downloading many CGs off the Danbooru image board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wsxedcrfv Posted June 8, 2010 Share Posted June 8, 2010 Unfortunately, yes. This is true, even on newer OSes (I use Windows XP x64 and Windows 7 too).You can achieve this, even if your downloads are small (But huge in number). The only workaround to this is to periodically clear any completed downloads from the download list.Thanks for confirming this.Is there some way I can "export" my download list (and all it's internal details, like the download URLs) to a text file so I don't lose that information before I clear the list? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rainyd Posted June 8, 2010 Share Posted June 8, 2010 Personally, I do not using built-in download manager (Firefox 3.5.10)Maybe you could try freeware FlashGet (classical version 1.73) plus FlashGot extension?I'm using that combo for a long time and I must say it's really effective.Btw, in that way, you can keep easier traces of your downloads (if you need that). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wsxedcrfv Posted June 9, 2010 Share Posted June 9, 2010 Personally, I do not using built-in download manager (Firefox 3.5.10). Maybe you could try freeware FlashGet (classical version 1.73) plus FlashGot extension? I'm using that combo for a long time and I must say it's really effective.I'm not aware of what the benefits are of running a separate, dedicated download manager vs the download service that most or all browsers have built into them.And btw, I've found that the file downloads.rdf contains all the download information that I want, so I will copy that file to another location before I clear my download list. My downloads.rdf is about 770kb in size. I wonder if the size of that file is proportional to the downloading processing / initiation time. I guess I'll find out soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philco Posted June 10, 2010 Share Posted June 10, 2010 Slowly after download (99-100% download)? Try verify system with scandisk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sp193 Posted June 10, 2010 Share Posted June 10, 2010 (edited) Slowly after download (99-100% download)? Try verify system with scandisk.No. We mean that Firefox becomes sluggish (When you have many items in your download list), and takes a while to initiate downloads. Once the download starts, the saving/download speed is (More or less) normal.I'm not aware of what the benefits are of running a separate, dedicated download manager vs the download service that most or all browsers have built into them.This is 1 very important factor: Most (If not all) download managers allow you to resume interrupted downloads (Firefox 1.x/2.x/3.x can't do that).Other than allowing you to resume broken downloads, some download managers also serve as download accelerators. I use Orbit downloader, and am quite satisfied with it. But some sites frown on you using download accelerators/multiple connections (So please read if they don't allow them!!).And btw, I've found that the file downloads.rdf contains all the download information that I want, so I will copy that file to another location before I clear my download list.I never knew that!My downloads.rdf is about 770kb in size. I wonder if the size of that file is proportional to the downloading processing / initiation time. I guess I'll find out soon. It seems to be. Firefox seems to become more sluggish when the number of items on my downloads list (completed downloads + active downloads) increases. I guess that it's got something about the increased requirement of memory/increased requirement of CPU time. Edited June 10, 2010 by sp193 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now