On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 00:57, James Knott wrote:

On 08/13/2015 06:10 PM, Daniel Bauer wrote:

...

Am 13.08.2015 um 23:55 schrieb Christopher Myers:

...

Out of curiosity, is there any way to tell why Firefox is eating up tons of memory, when it's only been running for a few hours, and just has a couple of tabs open? I'm using FF39 on oS 13.1.

It is an error by design, or a bug, but it seems that it is intentionally. FF keeps all the "seen" sites in memory and never again discards them until you completely close all instances of the same profile (close all windows).

It is very annoying, but it is as is...

I have also noticed that Firefox will bog down over time, until I kill it and restart.

For anyone that experience that kind of bloat, try to disable your addons and plugins, restart, try the same load of tabs and pages. IMHO in most cases of "creeping" bog over time, the cause is one or more addons. Sadly, "Adblock Plus" and "NoScript" are part of the cause, but not the ugliest anymore. "Ghostery" and "Flash-Player" are one of the worst offenders. To keep an eye on memory consumption, try the "memchaser" [1] addon, nice info, and easy access to forced memory compaction. For deeper insight where FX uses what on memory, have a look at the internal page "about:memory". Short intro: - Load page - click on "Measure" in the "Show memory reports" section - You can aslo "force" a memory free-up with the buttons in the "Free memory" section. [1] https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addon/memchaser/ - Yamaban -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-08-14 10:36, Daniel Bauer wrote:

After a while (depending on the number of sites opened and closed and of their content) memory fills up. When reaching more than 2GB (of my total 32) ff gets remarkably slower. When reaching 4GB it gets virtually unusable.

Typically those chunks get swapped out, but memory is probably very fragmented. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXN7ggACgkQja8UbcUWM1xqqQD+KkhAdBSXb9bAUttacyQ5jXPh c1HUaVe0VkDzGXwOXxMA/2AexlTMtSjUe1XdR93QXetfwN91ZUZl5wppB+IKSjyV =oLfL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

On 08/14/2015 12:42 AM, David C. Rankin wrote:

On 08/13/2015 05:57 PM, James Knott wrote:

...

I have also noticed that Firefox will bog down over time, until I kill it and restart.

I haven't had to worry about it lately... The last 15 or so versions of FF seem to do that for me on a regular basis.

(then this little window pops up saying something like "sending data to mozilla so the problem can be fixed...")

That's definitely a new "feature". It saves you the trouble of shutting it down occasionally. ;-) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

Am 14.08.2015 um 15:11 schrieb Christopher Myers:

Thanks for the replies everyone :)

To answer your questions:

I do have Flash installed, along with Xine and Java, along with Pipelight.

That kinda sucks about FF keeping all "seen" sites in memory, because I pop back and forth between different sites CONSTANTLY during my day, some of which are pretty heavy (like our campus scheduling site that I admin.) So that would make sense, in a way, I guess. I thought that was the whole purpose of doing the whole "browser.tabs.remote = true" hack in about:config so that each tab was in a different process?

I thought the bfcache can still be manipulated in about:config but cannot find a reference at this moment.

That sucks that Adblock Plus is a part of that, because I have that installed, and it's really nice :/

I would recommend uBlock Origin meanwhile. It should be lighter on memory and better in performance compared to any AdBlock*

Out of curiosity, does anyone know why Firefox caches all of the pages in memory and then doesn't clean them up? That definitely seems like a bug to me, but I'm guessing they have some reason for it. (Maybe - you might come back to this page, so it'll load faster next time?) If that's the case, is there any way to turn that off?

I wasn't aware of that fact. I know there is the regular cache which can be controlled via about:config or preferences and there is the bfcache which keeps the full document loaded for the case when you use the "back" button. But this used to have limitations which I cannot find right now. Usually it just saves up to a certain number of pages until the history is removed from bfcache. Wolfgang -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

Am 14.08.2015 um 15:42 schrieb Carlos E. R.:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256

On 2015-08-14 15:11, Christopher Myers wrote:

...

That sucks that Adblock Plus is a part of that, because I have that installed, and it's really nice :/

AddBlock uses lots of memory, because the stylesheet is loaded once per frame (FF bug). 4MB * N.

https://blog.mozilla.org/nnethercote/2014/05/14/adblock-pluss-effect-on-fire...

https://adblockplus.org/blog/on-the-adblock-plus-memory-consumption

http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/25j41u/adblock_pluss_effect_on_...

Alternative: block some sites entirely (on hosts file), block scripts, block flash.

page with 400 iFrames, With ABP, needs 1960MiB http://vimcolorschemetest.googlecode.com/svn/html/index-c.html (Do NOT click!)

See this comment:

+++—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—- Chrome Dev here. We see this (and much more) with chrome as well.

Adblock, noscript, ghostery, and other addons like them cause 90% of the issues we see in the forums.

At the very least, by running any of these you are:

Increasing memory usage anywhere from 10% to 30% increasing overall cpu usage across all cores increasing overall load time of the page by about 15% to 50% completely screwing many of the optimizations that have gone into the browser, effectively making the multi-threaded nature of the browser fight itself.

This is because these programs need to interrupt any and all http calls to check them against a big list of "no-no" domains held in memory. If it matches, they remove the element from the dom so it doesn't load and let the browser continue.

This has the effect of making every single thread sync up each time the dom is updated, so these extensions can scan the new elements to ensure they aren't loading ads/scripts. Fancy stuff like threaded compositing, network predictors and prefetchers, and batched layout rendering are all abandoned when any one of these is in play. —-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-++-

This is an interesting and logical explanation, although, instead of complaining, it would be wiser to integrate blockers more deeply, so that unwanted content doesn't get into the dom and therefore doesn't have to be removed. But that's too much dreaming, especially in regard of chrome, coming from a company that lives from abusing its users. Dpending on what you need to browse, of course, ad-blockers can be indispensable. All those music-players on blogs that suddenly shout on you with maximum volume, for example, those stupid overlays "follow us on fb", and all those millions of ads and analytics from f***ing google, that, besides of suggesting me sh*t I don't want, try to follow me trough the web without asking my permission, converting MY data into THEIR money... No no, I wouldn't surf without ad-/stats-blocker anymore.... -- Daniel Bauer photographer Basel Barcelona http://www.daniel-bauer.com room in Barcelona: https://www.airbnb.es/rooms/2416137 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

...

...

"Carlos E. R." 08/14/15 8:43 AM >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256

On 2015-08-14 15:11, Christopher Myers wrote:

...

That sucks that Adblock Plus is a part of that, because I have that installed, and it's really nice :/

AddBlock uses lots of memory, because the stylesheet is loaded once per frame (FF bug). 4MB * N.

https://blog.mozilla.org/nnethercote/2014/05/14/adblock-pluss-effect-on-fire...

https://adblockplus.org/blog/on-the-adblock-plus-memory-consumption

http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/25j41u/adblock_pluss_effect_on_...

Alternative: block some sites entirely (on hosts file), block scripts, block flash.

page with 400 iFrames, With ABP, needs 1960MiB http://vimcolorschemetest.googlecode.com/svn/html/index-c.html (Do NOT click!)

See this comment:

+++—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—- Chrome Dev here. We see this (and much more) with chrome as well.

Adblock, noscript, ghostery, and other addons like them cause 90% of the issues we see in the forums.

At the very least, by running any of these you are:

Increasing memory usage anywhere from 10% to 30% increasing overall cpu usage across all cores increasing overall load time of the page by about 15% to 50% completely screwing many of the optimizations that have gone into the browser, effectively making the multi-threaded nature of the browser fight itself.

This is because these programs need to interrupt any and all http calls to check them against a big list of "no-no" domains held in memory. If it matches, they remove the element from the dom so it doesn't load and let the browser continue.

This has the effect of making every single thread sync up each time the dom is updated, so these extensions can scan the new elements to ensure they aren't loading ads/scripts. Fancy stuff like threaded compositing, network predictors and prefetchers, and batched layout rendering are all abandoned when any one of these is in play. —-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-++-

Wow...that's crazy! And, would definitely explain some of the problems I've been having :/ At home, it's an easy fix for me because I run my own DNS servers, so I simply set up a bunch of ad zone files that point to a local apache install that has an .htaccess file that catches every URL posted to it and returns an empty page. -> problem solved :D Here at work (and in the wild) it's not quite so easy unfortunately. I could set up my hosts file to do that I guess, it would probably do the same thing in a lot of cases. I just found that the zone file + apache hack worked better because then I didn't get browser errors that way. Chris -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-08-14 17:13, Anton Aylward wrote:

On 08/14/2015 09:42 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:

...

Alternative: block some sites entirely (on hosts file),

Very efficacious. If you google you'll find there are a few tools to help support this, keep your block list up to date.

Yes, the link I posted talks about that in some depth.

The downside is that the adblockers rewrite the html so that the empty ads don't take up screen real estate while the DNS approach leave the gaps gaping.

I prefer the gaps :-) I prefer the layout or aspect of pages not to change. If there are white spaces, perhaps empty frames, I'm happy because I know the blocker worked. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF0EAREIAAYFAlXOCIEACgkQja8UbcUWM1z4vwD/VLyfpfAomdFu01ab/82O7nj0 hTHOUEyjzbLKxLcTE8QA91GfvPzxFvglY0ZKEx2Dc9dGOfjJhYW8lMb61saOT7Q= =8GyI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

Anton Aylward composed on 2015-08-14 11:13 (UTC-0400):

Carlos E. R. wrote:

...

Alternative: block some sites entirely (on hosts file),

Very efficacious. If you google you'll find there are a few tools to help support this, keep your block list up to date.

The downside is that the adblockers rewrite the html so that the empty ads don't take up screen real estate while the DNS approach leave the gaps gaping.

My ad blocking is a combination of hosts and CSS, nothing via extension, applied mostly only to my primary SeaMonkey profile, with most blocking done in CSS. I use a variation on the description at http://www.floppymoose.com/ that uses a file adblock.css[1] that is imported by userContent.css. I've occasionally thought about using router to block, but if I was doing it that way, AFAICT, it would be too troublesome to switch off in order to investigate problematic consequences of blocking on particular sites. [1] http://fm.no-ip.com/Css/Share/adblock.css -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

Bob Williams composed on 2015-08-27 12:06 (UTC+0100):

Felix Miata wrote:

...

My ad blocking is a combination of hosts and CSS, nothing via extension, applied mostly only to my primary SeaMonkey profile, with most blocking done in CSS. I use a variation on the description at http://www.floppymoose.com/ that uses a file adblock.css[1] that is imported by userContent.css. I've occasionally thought about using router to block, but if I was doing it that way, AFAICT, it would be too troublesome to switch off in order to investigate problematic consequences of blocking on particular sites.

...

[1] http://fm.no-ip.com/Css/Share/adblock.css

Felix,

I've downloaded both userContent.css and adblock.css but I'm not clear where to put them. Floppymoose says "You need to place the userContent.css file in the chrome directory of your browser user profile."

Here I have

/home/bob/.mozilla/firefox/6f2qt29b.default-1419149496798/storage/permanent/chrome

and

/home/bob/.mozilla/firefox/6f2qt29b.default-1419149496798/extensions/{8A6C82A1-F6C9-481a-AAE7-C96444C9A754}/chrome

? but neither contains any CSS files (yet).

Which one should I be using? I'm running Firefox 40.0 on openSUSE 13.2 64bit, with KDE 4.14.9

Chrome/ or chrome/ belong in the same tree that contains the directories; Mail/, News/, caches/, safebrowsing/, minidumps/, jetpack/, extensions/, startupcache/, onlinecache/, et all, and contains files such as prefs.js, places.sqlite, abook.mab, panacea.dat, blocklist.xml and user.js. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 27/08/15 13:01, Yamaban wrote:

On Thu, 27 Aug 2015 13:06, Bob Williams wrote:

...

On 14/08/15 18:37, Felix Miata wrote: [..]

...

My ad blocking is a combination of hosts and CSS, nothing via extension, applied mostly only to my primary SeaMonkey profile, with most blocking done in CSS. I use a variation on the description at http://www.floppymoose.com/ that uses a file adblock.css[1] that is imported by userContent.css. I've occasionally thought about using router to block, but if I was doing it that way, AFAICT, it would be too troublesome to switch off in order to investigate problematic consequences of blocking on particular sites.

[1] http://fm.no-ip.com/Css/Share/adblock.css

Felix,

I've downloaded both userContent.css and adblock.css but I'm not clear where to put them. Floppymoose says "You need to place the userContent.css file in the chrome directory of your browser user profile."

Here I have

/home/bob/.mozilla/firefox/6f2qt29b.default-1419149496798/storage/permanent/chrome

and

...

/home/bob/.mozilla/firefox/6f2qt29b.default-1419149496798/extensions/{8A6C82A1-F6C9-481a-AAE7-C96444C9A754}/chrome

but neither contains any CSS files (yet).

...

Which one should I be using? I'm running Firefox 40.0 on openSUSE 13.2 64bit, with KDE 4.14.9

That "chrome" folder has to be created in the main profile folder, here: "/home/bob/.mozilla/firefox/6f2qt29b.default-1419149496798/" is the profile folder, and in there the "chrome" folder has to be created:

mkdir /home/bob/.mozilla/firefox/6f2qt29b.default-1419149496798/chrome

into this folder place the files "userContent.css" and "adblock.css"

please be aware that the exact spelling with upper and lowercase is needed.

- Yamaban.

Many thanks. It seems to work on some sites, but not all. I shall now investigate how to fine tune it. Bob - -- Bob Williams System: Linux 3.16.7-7-desktop Distro: openSUSE 13.2 (x86_64) with KDE Development Platform: 4.14.3 Uptime: 06:00am up 7:55, 3 users, load average: 0.16, 0.05, 0.06 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iEYEARECAAYFAlXe/jsACgkQ0Sr7eZJrmU4dEACeMxyfZ+/4ydPAA3i51shZAu6W twIAn2aZ4TSzDEEmQK2iWZ7eh7eoZKgr =Qsua -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

Le 27/08/2015 11:55, Dsant a écrit :

I tried recently with several browsers, they all eaten my 8Gb memory after some work days (FF 37.0.2). Very annoying.

but linux systems do not release memory if there is no demand. Did you test the ram with other application running, like Libre office or kdenlive during rendering? I also find often than Firefox is too slow, it's sometime necessary to restart it jdd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

* ellanios82 [08-27-15 06:23]: [...]

.................

for me , akonadi has sometimes eaten too much resources ,

and needed to do :

Konsole output # killall -9 akonadiserver

Why not just: akonadictl restart -- (paka)Patrick Shanahan Plainfield, Indiana, USA @ptilopteri http://en.opensuse.org openSUSE Community Member facebook/ptilopteri http://wahoo.no-ip.org Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2 Registered Linux User #207535 @ http://linuxcounter.net -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org