considering how slow and bloated every mozilla app is..

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
16 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

considering how slow and bloated every mozilla app is..

gperry
..I'm very surprised that this group is virtually empty.
_______________________________________________
dev-performance mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-performance
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: considering how slow and bloated every mozilla app is..

Boris Zbarsky
gperry wrote:
> ..I'm very surprised that this group is virtually empty.

Most performance discussion happens in bugs and on irc.  This group is
not really used as a venue for communicating about performance issues
(and we should probably just get rid of it, I guess).

That said, do you have specific numbers/examples to support your
"bloated" assertion?  For that matter, do you have specific issues that
you describe as "slow"?  A general "slow" is not an actionable item.

-Boris
_______________________________________________
dev-performance mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-performance
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: considering how slow and bloated every mozilla app is..

gperry
On 30/08/2009 16:15, Boris Zbarsky wrote:

> That said, do you have specific numbers/examples to support your
> "bloated" assertion?
FF is currently at 150meg, it'll 300 before long and I'll have to close.
Those figures are normal for FF atm.
TB and Lightning are 160meg. Outlook is running along side it with the
same imap accounts and remote calendars and it's just over 35meg (and
it's way faster).


  For that matter, do you have specific issues that
> you describe as "slow"? A general "slow" is not an actionable item.
>
> -Boris
-Page laods are slow in FF, slower than even IE. Chrome and Opera make
FF look like a joke.
-javascript performance is horrible
-When pages are loading, the rest of the interface is unresponsive. In
fact is takes so much processor priority as too jam up the entire
operating system.
-'complex' webpages jam up the browser, leading to slow scrolling and
slow inteface. By 'complex' I mean a little bit of javascript or an
image table with a few effects, or some text decoration here and there.

-It takes over 3 minutes for thunderbird and lightning to start up, and
they are unresponsive during that time. remote calendars reload multiple
times, windows will white out the window as it becomes un responsive
(multiple times), cpu usage will get stuck at 50%+, it slows downs the
rest of the OS, it's only in the last minute or so that it actually
starts pulling down email.
-after it's loaded, lightning is still painfully slow. every page scroll
requires multiple, intensive calendar redraws/refreshs
-despite having spent so long starting up, it still doesn't pull down
rss feeds at start up, instead leaving it 5-10minutes after startup.


The list goes on. And they are all obvious and well known ones. The fact
you'd even have to ask means that, if you are a developer, you are a
badly out of touch one.

I read through these dev forums excepting to see performance being at
the very top of the agenda, seeing as how firefox made it's name on
being fast and it is now almost as slow as IE (and in some respects
slower), but a cursory glance tells me that the devs are far more
concerned with a fancy new UI.
_______________________________________________
dev-performance mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-performance
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: considering how slow and bloated every mozilla app is..

Martijn-4
On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 6:53 PM, gperry<[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 30/08/2009 16:15, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
>
>> That said, do you have specific numbers/examples to support your
>> "bloated" assertion?
>
> FF is currently at 150meg, it'll 300 before long and I'll have to close.
> Those figures are normal for FF atm.
> TB and Lightning are 160meg. Outlook is running along side it with the same
> imap accounts and remote calendars and it's just over 35meg (and it's way
> faster).
>
>
>  For that matter, do you have specific issues that
>>
>> you describe as "slow"? A general "slow" is not an actionable item.
>>
>> -Boris
>
> -Page laods are slow in FF, slower than even IE. Chrome and Opera make FF
> look like a joke.
> -javascript performance is horrible
> -When pages are loading, the rest of the interface is unresponsive. In fact
> is takes so much processor priority as too jam up the entire operating
> system.
> -'complex' webpages jam up the browser, leading to slow scrolling and slow
> inteface. By 'complex' I mean a little bit of javascript or an image table
> with a few effects, or some text decoration here and there.
>
> -It takes over 3 minutes for thunderbird and lightning to start up, and they
> are unresponsive during that time. remote calendars reload multiple times,
> windows will white out the window as it becomes un responsive (multiple
> times), cpu usage will get stuck at 50%+, it slows downs the rest of the OS,
> it's only in the last minute or so that it actually starts pulling down
> email.
> -after it's loaded, lightning is still painfully slow. every page scroll
> requires multiple, intensive calendar redraws/refreshs
> -despite having spent so long starting up, it still doesn't pull down rss
> feeds at start up, instead leaving it 5-10minutes after startup.
>
>
> The list goes on. And they are all obvious and well known ones. The fact
> you'd even have to ask means that, if you are a developer, you are a badly
> out of touch one.
>
> I read through these dev forums excepting to see performance being at the
> very top of the agenda, seeing as how firefox made it's name on being fast
> and it is now almost as slow as IE (and in some respects slower), but a
> cursory glance tells me that the devs are far more concerned with a fancy
> new UI.

Do you have any extensions installed? Do you use a different theme
than the default one?
What cpu speed do you have?

Regards,
Martijn

> _______________________________________________
> dev-performance mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-performance
>



--
Martijn Wargers - Help Mozilla!
http://quality.mozilla.org/
http://wiki.mozilla.org/Mozilla_QA_Community
irc://irc.mozilla.org/qa - /nick mw22
_______________________________________________
dev-performance mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-performance
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: considering how slow and bloated every mozilla app is..

Mike Beltzner
On 30-Aug-09, at 1:08 PM, Martijn wrote:

> Do you have any extensions installed? Do you use a different theme
> than the default one?
> What cpu speed do you have?

If these are the problems the user should go to http://support.mozilla.com

My impression is that while well-intentioned, we're just feeding a  
troll here. Let's not.

cheers,
mike
_______________________________________________
dev-performance mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-performance
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: considering how slow and bloated every mozilla app is..

Chris Hofmann-3
In reply to this post by Martijn-4
Martijn wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 6:53 PM, gperry<[hidden email]> wrote:
>  
>> On 30/08/2009 16:15, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
>>
>>    
>>> That said, do you have specific numbers/examples to support your
>>> "bloated" assertion?
>>>      
>> FF is currently at 150meg, it'll 300 before long and I'll have to close.
>> Those figures are normal for FF atm.
>>    
doing what?

not saying this to be defensive.  detailed and specific examples and
test beyond what you list below is what we need to take actionable steps.

>> TB and Lightning are 160meg. Outlook is running along side it with the same
>> imap accounts and remote calendars and it's just over 35meg (and it's way
>> faster).
>>
>>
>>  For that matter, do you have specific issues that
>>    
>>> you describe as "slow"? A general "slow" is not an actionable item.
>>>
>>> -Boris
>>>      
>> -Page laods are slow in FF, slower than even IE. Chrome and Opera make FF
>> look like a joke.
>>
>>    
which "pages"?
by how much?
>> -javascript performance is horrible
>>    
on which bench mark or page?
>> -When pages are loading, the rest of the interface is unresponsive. In fact
>> is takes so much processor priority as too jam up the entire operating
>> system.
>>    
which pages?   good test cases needed/wanted.
>> -'complex' webpages jam up the browser, leading to slow scrolling and slow
>> inteface. By 'complex' I mean a little bit of javascript or an image table
>> with a few effects, or some text decoration here and there.
>>
>>    
which pages or test cases show this?  can you point at one or put one
together?

>> -It takes over 3 minutes for thunderbird and lightning to start up, and they
>> are unresponsive during that time. remote calendars reload multiple times,
>> windows will white out the window as it becomes un responsive (multiple
>> times), cpu usage will get stuck at 50%+, it slows downs the rest of the OS,
>> it's only in the last minute or so that it actually starts pulling down
>> email.
>> -after it's loaded, lightning is still painfully slow. every page scroll
>> requires multiple, intensive calendar redraws/refreshs
>> -despite having spent so long starting up, it still doesn't pull down rss
>> feeds at start up, instead leaving it 5-10minutes after startup.
>>
>>
>> The list goes on. And they are all obvious and well known ones. The fact
>> you'd even have to ask means that, if you are a developer, you are a badly
>> out of touch one.
>>
>> I read through these dev forums excepting to see performance being at the
>> very top of the agenda, seeing as how firefox made it's name on being fast
>> and it is now almost as slow as IE (and in some respects slower), but a
>> cursory glance tells me that the devs are far more concerned with a fancy
>> new UI.
>>    
>
> Do you have any extensions installed? Do you use a different theme
> than the default one?
> What cpu speed do you have?
>
>  
what operating system?

-chofmann

> Regards,
> Martijn
>
>  
>> _______________________________________________
>> dev-performance mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-performance
>>
>>    
>
>
>
>  
_______________________________________________
dev-performance mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-performance
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: considering how slow and bloated every mozilla app is..

gperry
In reply to this post by gperry
On 30/08/2009 18:08, Martijn wrote:

> Do you have any extensions installed? Do you use a different theme
> than the default one?
> What cpu speed do you have?
>
> Regards,
> Martijn
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dev-performance mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-performance
>>
>
>
>
Yes, I expected that kind of form response.
Extensions/safemode/hardware. Blame everything but the actual app. This
kind of response is the default on every forum and support group. It's
tiresome and patronizing.

fwiw, extensions running are adblock plus, dom inspector, autofill
forms, add bookmarks.. there are a few, but it doesn't make any
different whether they are running or not. The behavior is part of FF,
not the addons. I'm not so stupid that I haven't ruled these out.
The hardware is a 3.2ghz HT pentium on W7 with 2gig. It's plenty fast
enough for what should be a simple web browser. It runs photoshop and
dreamweaver, side by side, faster than FF on its own.
_______________________________________________
dev-performance mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-performance
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: considering how slow and bloated every mozilla app is..

gperry
In reply to this post by Martijn-4
On 30/08/2009 18:18, chris hofmann wrote:

> Martijn wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 6:53 PM, gperry<[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> On 30/08/2009 16:15, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
>>>
>>>> That said, do you have specific numbers/examples to support your
>>>> "bloated" assertion?
>>> FF is currently at 150meg, it'll 300 before long and I'll have to close.
>>> Those figures are normal for FF atm.
> doing what?
> not saying this to be defensive. detailed and specific examples and test
> beyond what you list below is what we need to take actionable steps.
Normal browsing over the course of a few hours, with never more than 3
or 4 tabs open. Sites include ebay, some php and vbb forums and some
blogs, normal stuff, normal use. Now at 150 meg again, after having
restarted it about 10 minutes ago. It starts at 50meg rises quickly,
stays at about 150, then on occasional feature rich page it'll go to
300, and important it never sheds the memory when you navigate away.

(while I was typing this, thunderbird seized up, whited out and become
unresponsive to key presses for 30 seconds. 30 secs after that, my
remote calendars events redrew on the today page.)

>>> TB and Lightning are 160meg. Outlook is running along side it with
>>> the same
>>> imap accounts and remote calendars and it's just over 35meg (and it's
>>> way
>>> faster).
>>>
>>>
>>> For that matter, do you have specific issues that
>>>> you describe as "slow"? A general "slow" is not an actionable item.
>>>>
>>>> -Boris
>>> -Page laods are slow in FF, slower than even IE. Chrome and Opera
>>> make FF
>>> look like a joke.
>>>
> which "pages"?
> by how much?
Every page. Some times it appears to load faster, but the time taken
before the page actually becomes available to me to scroll etc, is much
longer. This is again down the the sheer cpu resources that FF needs to
load a page.
>>> -javascript performance is horrible
> on which bench mark or page?
>>> -When pages are loading, the rest of the interface is unresponsive.
>>> In fact
>>> is takes so much processor priority as too jam up the entire operating
>>> system.
> which pages? good test cases needed/wanted.
Again, every page, compare page loads in FF to opera, chrome and IE,
you'll see cpu hit 80-90% on every page in FF, while the rest barely
break a sweat.
>>> -'complex' webpages jam up the browser, leading to slow scrolling and
>>> slow
>>> inteface. By 'complex' I mean a little bit of javascript or an image
>>> table
>>> with a few effects, or some text decoration here and there.
>>>
> which pages or test cases show this? can you point at one or put one
> together?
Next time I come across one I'll post it here.

_______________________________________________
dev-performance mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-performance
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: considering how slow and bloated every mozilla app is..

gperry
In reply to this post by Martijn-4
On 30/08/2009 18:14, Mike Beltzner wrote:

> On 30-Aug-09, at 1:08 PM, Martijn wrote:
>
>> Do you have any extensions installed? Do you use a different theme
>> than the default one?
>> What cpu speed do you have?
>
> If these are the problems the user should go to http://support.mozilla.com
>
> My impression is that while well-intentioned, we're just feeding a troll
> here. Let's not.
>
> cheers,
> mike

I am not looking for support, I don't need it. I'm just surprised to see
so little performance related development despite reading, on nearly
every forum, I visit a continually stream of complaints about the
increasing drop of performance in the mozilla apps. The fact that you
think this is a support issue, imo, again reflects this apparent
disconnect between end-users and the devs here.
_______________________________________________
dev-performance mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-performance
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: considering how slow and bloated every mozilla app is..

Mike Beltzner
On 30-Aug-09, at 2:25 PM, gperry wrote:

> I am not looking for support, I don't need it. I'm just surprised to  
> see so little performance related development despite reading, on  
> nearly every forum, I visit a continually stream of

I've already pointed you to other forums where discussion is taking  
place, and encourage you to review and contribute in any of the  
discussions there. We discuss performance weekly at our development  
meeting. If you're interested, here are some links:

bugs:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=sw:%22[ts%22

project details:
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Projects/Startup_Time_Improvements

meeting notes:
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Platform/2009-08-25#Startup_Performance
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Platform/2009-08-18#Startup_Performance

The specific issues you are seeing are not commonplace, and all due  
respect, you're misreading the memory values between applications and  
not comparing apples to apples (for instance, the firefox.exe process  
also reports memory consumed by plugins, which iexplore.exe and  
chrome.exe do not).

If I've misread your tone, and you actually do wish to get involved  
and assist, I apologize and look forward to your contributions.  
However, your existing tone has been hostile and sarcastic to date,  
and I'm not really interested in getting into arguments about whether  
or not the Mozilla community cares about performance or its users.  
You're free to believe as you wish, and contribute if it's within your  
interest. If you merely wish to complain, consider it registered and  
choose to believe what you will about our desire to fix the issue.

cheers,
mike
_______________________________________________
dev-performance mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-performance
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: considering how slow and bloated every mozilla app is..

gperry
In reply to this post by gperry
On 30/08/2009 18:08, Martijn wrote:

> Do you have any extensions installed? Do you use a different theme
> than the default one?
> What cpu speed do you have?
>
> Regards,
> Martijn
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dev-performance mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-performance
>>
>
>
>
here, if further prove were needed that extensions make little
difference to the bloat, here is firefox after 5 minutes of randamly
opening and closing sites, no extensions, no themes.
http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v91/c0ldfury/?action=view&current=Capture-1.jpg
_______________________________________________
dev-performance mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-performance
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: considering how slow and bloated every mozilla app is..

gperry
On 30/08/2009 19:47, gperry wrote:
> On 30/08/2009 18:08, Martijn wrote:

> here, if further prove were needed that extensions make little
> difference to the bloat, here is firefox after 5 minutes of randamly
> opening and closing sites, no extensions, no themes.
> http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v91/c0ldfury/?action=view&current=Capture-1.jpg
>

apologies; http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v91/c0ldfury/Capture-1.jpg
_______________________________________________
dev-performance mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-performance
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: considering how slow and bloated every mozilla app is..

gperry
In reply to this post by gperry
On 30/08/2009 19:42, Mike Beltzner wrote:

> On 30-Aug-09, at 2:25 PM, gperry wrote:
>
>> I am not looking for support, I don't need it. I'm just surprised to
>> see so little performance related development despite reading, on
>> nearly every forum, I visit a continually stream of
>
> I've already pointed you to other forums where discussion is taking
> place, and encourage you to review and contribute in any of the
> discussions there. We discuss performance weekly at our development
> meeting. If you're interested, here are some links:
>
> bugs:
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=sw:%22[ts%22
>
> project details:
> https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Projects/Startup_Time_Improvements
>
> meeting notes:
> https://wiki.mozilla.org/Platform/2009-08-25#Startup_Performance
> https://wiki.mozilla.org/Platform/2009-08-18#Startup_Performance
>
I am familiar with bugzilla, and that it also shows a lack of interest
in performance related issues.
The other links seems to be startup time related, which is actually one
of the least important performance aspects.

> The specific issues you are seeing are not commonplace, and all due
> respect, you're misreading the memory values between applications and
> not comparing apples to apples (for instance, the firefox.exe process
> also reports memory consumed by plugins, which iexplore.exe and
> chrome.exe do not).
Do those plugins account for the 100s of megs of aculated bloat that FF
carries with it?
>
> If I've misread your tone,
You have indeed.


_______________________________________________
dev-performance mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-performance
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: considering how slow and bloated every mozilla app is..

gperry
In reply to this post by gperry
On 30/08/2009 19:47, gperry wrote:

> On 30/08/2009 18:08, Martijn wrote:
>
>> Do you have any extensions installed? Do you use a different theme
>> than the default one?
>> What cpu speed do you have?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Martijn
>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> dev-performance mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-performance
>>>
>>
>>
>>
> here, if further prove were needed that extensions make little
> difference to the bloat, here is firefox after 5 minutes of randamly
> opening and closing sites, no extensions, no themes.
> http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v91/c0ldfury/?action=view&current=Capture-1.jpg
>
minutes later; http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v91/c0ldfury/Capture-2.jpg
_______________________________________________
dev-performance mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-performance
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: considering how slow and bloated every mozilla app is..

Boris Zbarsky
In reply to this post by gperry
gperry wrote:
> here, if further prove were needed that extensions make little
> difference to the bloat, here is firefox after 5 minutes of randamly
> opening and closing sites, no extensions, no themes.
> http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v91/c0ldfury/?action=view&current=Capture-1.jpg 

Interesting.  That doesn't match my experience at all, but certainly
looks like a real issue.  I assume this is Firefox 3.5.x?  Do you think
you can send me the list of sites loaded during that session?  Is there
a bug filed?

 > Do those plugins account for the 100s of megs of aculated bloat that
 > FF carries with it?

Some Flash versions leak like a sieves, so "maybe", depending on what
you're doing, which exact plug-in versions you're using, which Firefox
version you're using, etc...

-Boris
_______________________________________________
dev-performance mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-performance
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: considering how slow and bloated every mozilla app is..

gperry
In reply to this post by gperry

>> which pages or test cases show this? can you point at one or put one
>> together?
> Next time I come across one I'll post it here.
>
http://twitter.com/rbmax

http://twitter.com/** for that matter.
_______________________________________________
dev-performance mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-performance