MozillaZine

memory leak problem has not been fixed since version 4!!!!!!

Discussion of general topics about Mozilla Firefox
alexbz
 
Posts: 5
Joined: January 8th, 2012, 10:00 am

Post Posted January 8th, 2012, 10:24 am

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=2182289

When is Mozilla going to fix this problem??????????????????

Every version since 4 has the same problem : if you open this link

http://www.gcforum.org/viewthread.php?tid=5721

the memory consumption will jump to 1,3 GB.

version 3.6 uses around 300 MB memory. if you scroll it jumps to around 600 MB.

so even if version 3.6 is not perfect its still not as bad as all the versions since 4.

so regarding the memory leak problem nothing has improved since version 4. [-(

Frank Lion

User avatar
 
Posts: 20832
Joined: April 23rd, 2004, 6:59 pm
Location: ... The Exorcist....United Kingdom

Post Posted January 8th, 2012, 10:34 am

alexbz wrote:...if you open this link

http://www.gcforum.org/viewthread.php?tid=5721

the memory consumption will jump to 1,3 GB.

...when using IE as well, I note.

Conclusion = don't open that link. Problem solved.
Metal Lion latest SeaMonkey & Thunderbird Themes - Sea Monkey and Silver Sea Monkey
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil, is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke (attrib.)

Cru_N_cher
 
Posts: 377
Joined: January 31st, 2010, 11:15 am

Post Posted January 8th, 2012, 10:55 am

before Visit (from this page tab) = 960 MB
visiting url = ~2.2 GB
after visit (back to this post in memory) = ~980 MB

nothing strange though nice page with that mixed flash content for testing things like JPG rendering efficiency and Flash playback behavior @ load of those massive amounts of (progressive encoded) pictures on the same site :)
i guess those 20 MB though got stuck somewhere in the Flash part.
No visible memory leak though, test was done with D2D disabled.

See my Namoroka tests (exactly those 2,x memory usage) yeah it indeed used to need less memory then when Minefield started but GC is a nice compromise of cleaning this load after visit (after some seconds it gets wiped out of memory), and it works well, though as you say if the subjective improvement between 3.6 and 4.0 is zero you could ask the question for what double the memory is needed for this kind of picture page rendering now, and what benefits you get from this specific page with double the memory used while visiting (compared to Namoroka) ?)

RobertJ
Moderator

User avatar
 
Posts: 10870
Joined: October 15th, 2003, 7:40 pm
Location: Chicago IL/Oconomowoc WI

Post Posted January 8th, 2012, 11:13 am

One additional bit of info for that page, it loads 73M of HTML, CSS and content including graphics. By contrast most pages average about 300K (e.g., BBC). So to pick a page that has about 250 times more content and then complain leads me to the conclusion you are a troll.

LOCKING


.
FF 83.0 - FF 83b9 - FF 84a - TB 78.4.1 - Mac OSX 10.13.6

Return to Firefox General


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests