Mathwiz Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 19 hours ago, UCyborg said: Some interesting insights regarding memory leaks and CPU usages spikes. It's a recurring topic and it appears it will stay that way unless something changes radically, either the web at large or the web browser. For those who don't want to read through a long thread, I offer the following pull-quote from MC: Quote Yeah the problem is ghost windows, i.e. tabs you've closed but that have created structures so large or complex that the garbage collector can't clean them up. Specifically both vk.com and github.com are causing this, causing leaked/detached event handlers (several thousand of them each!) that just keep spinning the event loop with no work done and since they are still "live", the garbage collector can't clean them as there's a limit to how deep it will trace when trying to decide if something can be tossed. Ultimately this is bad website design (most likely circular dependencies), aided by opaque technologies like shadow dom and web workers that by design have to run de-coupled from page content, that other browsers avoid the symptoms of because they throw the baby out with the bath water (multi-process doesn't care if its a mess, as it doesn't try to do normal garbage collection and just kills the process that had the tab loaded, effectively the same as if you'd restart the browser after every site visit). I tend to agree, both with MC's take (bad website design) and @VistaLover's pessimism that anything will change. "It runs just fine on the latest Chrome and even Firefox, with only 64GB RAM and five dozen processor cores! What - you don't throw out and replace your PC every month? You aren't running Win 11? What's wrong with you?" 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ascii2 Posted February 11 Share Posted February 11 21 hours ago, UCyborg said: Some interesting insights regarding memory leaks and CPU usages spikes. It's a recurring topic and it appears it will stay that way unless something changes radically, either the web at large or the web browser. The issue described has been quite annoying and troublesome. The problem appears to be one of resource abuse/sloppiness and garbage collection in the client applications. It would seem that newer Mozilla browser applications or Gecko might not provide much, if at all, any safeguarding of resource management. Could the problem alleviated by improving the programming in these areas? Maybe garbage collection from past Gecko can be incorporated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ascii2 Posted February 11 Share Posted February 11 (edited) Previous post posted twice. Please disregard this post. Edited February 11 by Ascii2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.Draker Posted February 11 Share Posted February 11 6 hours ago, Mathwiz said: For those who don't want to read through a long thread, I offer the following pull-quote from MC: I tend to agree, both with MC's take (bad website design) and @VistaLover's pessimism that anything will change. "It runs just fine on the latest Chrome and even Firefox, with only 64GB RAM and five dozen processor cores! What - you don't throw out and replace your PC every month? You aren't running Win 11? What's wrong with you?" Over-exaggeration, it runs just fine with only 8GB of 20 years old DDR2 RAM and a 16 years old core quad processor q9650 with only 4 cores! What - you don't throw out and replace your PC every couple of decades? What's wrong with you?" 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reboot12 Posted February 11 Share Posted February 11 Why the some websites does not work correctly in Basilisk or PaleMoon: https://winraid.level1techs.com https://discourse.coreelec.org Unfortunately, [your browser is unsupported](https://www.discourse.org/faq/#browser). Please [switch to a supported browser](https://browsehappy.com/) to view rich content, log in and reply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmiranda Posted February 11 Share Posted February 11 (edited) 13 hours ago, Mathwiz said: For those who don't want to read through a long thread, I offer the following pull-quote from MC: I tend to agree, both with MC's take (bad website design) and @VistaLover's pessimism that anything will change. "It runs just fine on the latest Chrome and even Firefox, with only 64GB RAM and five dozen processor cores! What - you don't throw out and replace your PC every month? You aren't running Win 11? What's wrong with you?" I think this extension, https://webextension.org/listing/tab-reloader.html, mitigates the underlying issue, particularly regarding bloated social media and news/sites that want to update content on "real time". I don't know that much about github/gitlab, but they seem to also behave with this extension on. The latest version in the firefox extensions site installs and seems to work well in sp52 (with e10s). Edited February 11 by dmiranda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j7n Posted February 11 Share Posted February 11 I've had this issue with persistent CPU usage after closing heavy sites. But it's quick to work around by closing the browser and opening it fresh. Quicker than installing any patch. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VistaLover Posted February 11 Share Posted February 11 2 hours ago, dmiranda said: I think this extension, https://webextension.org/listing/tab-reloader.html , mitigates the underlying issue, particularly regarding bloated social media and news/sites that want to update content on "real time". I don't know that much about github/gitlab, but they seem to also behave with this extension on. The latest version in the firefox extensions site installs and seems to work well in sp52 (with e10s). ... Well, as explained by Moonchild in the linked PMForums comment, the "underlying issue" involves "ghost browser windows" that keep devouring H/W resources even after tabs have been closed; are these ghost windows being killed just by reloading a tab via that extension? Unless the ghost window(s) are being created ONLY after a tab has been closed ... As also noted by MC, e10s is the way "mainstream" browser engines mitigate the underlying issue, but the upstream apps are single-process ONLY; of the roytam1 forks, St52/55 can be forced to enable e10s, but this is an unsupported configuration (which, in itself, requires "better" H/W ) that uses a half-baked multiprocess implementation (never meant to work under XP, BTW) by Mozilla from the Fx52 era, inadequate at best to handle bloated web pages (read: apps) in 2024... As for GitHub, I wouldn't want a GH tab auto-reload in the middle of me composing a New Issue or comment ... Thank you , though, for the recommendation (which, again, is no good for "upstream" and NM28, since WEs are out of the question...). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VistaLover Posted February 11 Share Posted February 11 (edited) 5 hours ago, reboot12 said: Why some websites do not work correctly in Basilisk or Pale Moon: https://winraid.level1techs.com https://discourse.coreelec.org ... Please, refer to the roytam1 forks as Serpent 52 and New Moon 28 , so as not to unnecessarily vex "upstream" (Basilisk-dev, MCP) and also NOT create confusion among mis-informed fork users, that may end up seeking support "there" for their browser(s) running on XP/Vista ; thanks in advance... As for the issue you reported, it has been already reported inside these threads more times than I'd care to remember ; use the Forums Search utility, search for "discourse based forums" ; two, fairly recent, posts from yours truly : 1 , 2 Best regards ... PS: @reboot12 : You may want to fix the links in your report above, as both link to: https://msfn.org/board/topic/185966-my-browser-builds-part-5/page/12/ Edited February 11 by VistaLover Fixed links in the quoted excerpt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jody Thornton Posted February 11 Share Posted February 11 11 hours ago, D.Draker said: Over-exaggeration, it runs just fine with only 8GB of 20 years old DDR2 RAM and a 16 years old core quad processor q9650 with only 4 cores! What - you don't throw out and replace your PC every couple of decades? What's wrong with you?" What's wrong with you D.Draker? You and Dixel (starting to think you're one and the same) are acting horribly and unreasonably to people - some who are very long time members here. Keep it over in your own threads if you must. You've could have easily said, "I didn't experience the same symptoms as you did." or something of the like, but you just attack first without thinking or considering who you might be talking to. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.Draker Posted February 11 Share Posted February 11 4 hours ago, Jody Thornton said: What's wrong with you D.Draker? You and Dixel (starting to think you're one and the same) are acting horribly and unreasonably to people - some who are very long time members here. Keep it over in your own threads if you must. You've could have easily said, "I didn't experience the same symptoms as you did." or something of the like, but you just attack first without thinking or considering who you might be talking to. How "long time membership" is relevant if a member writes a gross over-exaggeration in terms of hardware requirements? You were "attacked" with the fact of Core Quad/DDR2 being enough for that Firefox task? LOL. Well, frankly, it's not my problem. Jody, this attraction is not mutual, sorry to disappoint, please stop chasing me, also don't involve me into the affairs with other members. If you want to talk, we can talk, but only if you try to prove me wrong with the similar results on your hardware. I'm not interested in your usual derailing activities. I don't see "admin" on your account. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reboot12 Posted February 11 Share Posted February 11 @VistaLover I do not use uBO but I used advice from this > Link I installed Modify HTTP Response 1.3.8 addon and I added a page winraid.level1techs.com with the help of the editor: must be removed at the end of the sign / add this |winraid\.level1techs\.com at the end insert a sign / click Save It works Thanks 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VistaLover Posted February 11 Share Posted February 11 (edited) 23 hours ago, reboot12 said: Thanks ... You're welcome ... 23 hours ago, reboot12 said: I installed Modify HTTP Response 1.3.8 addon ... Just so you know, the UXP platform (i.e. St52/NM28 browsers) now supports natively the javascript "??=" operator), so the "Modify HTTP Response"-based solution isn't the most current; the solutions I linked to above (requiring either uBO or Greasemonkey) are quasi-global ones, that encompass almost 99% of the discourse-based forums found on-line ; whereas the option you chose requires adding additional domains for the forums you'll find being "unsupported" in your future browsing; just my 2c ... Best wishes. Edited February 12 by VistaLover Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mina7601 Posted February 11 Share Posted February 11 (edited) 1 hour ago, reboot12 said: @VistaLover I do not use uBO but I used advice from this > Link Not only is this solution very old as said above, I didn't have so much luck with it. It only made a few Discourse-based forums work, and others still remained broken as they are. I, however, had so much luck with this solution > Link (the userscript manager method) It was much easier for me to apply, and it made ALL Discourse-based forums work. Edited February 11 by mina7601 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reboot12 Posted February 11 Share Posted February 11 @VistaLover @mina7601 OK, but: I don't want to use uBO I use only a few forums based on discourse: winraid, openwrt or coreelec I am not disturbed by the way with the Modify HTTP Response plugin 1 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