µBlock (uBlock)

[AnimaliX]

hello,
why is not here own thread about µBlock (uBlock) which is recently also for firefox ?
https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/releases

my first impression is very good (0.8.7.0)... firstly functionality is comparable with adblock and with markedly lower memory consumption
i can now disable "Adblock Plus", "Adblock Plus Pop-up Addon" and "Element Hiding Helper for Adblock Plus"

[Noitidart]

Still adblock plus for me. It works very effectively. The only issue is on slower computers adblock plus doesnt kick in right away on browser startup.

[AnimaliX]

i think ABP can create "slow" computer very easy... everything what you need to do is check some big lists (like easylist) then consumation of memory go much beyond 1GB and firefox become slow and unstable
with uBlock i have not experienced anything like that for now

https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock#memory

[Noitidart]

O_O yikes, if going through a simple list like that is taking your memory to 1gb i think you need to check your computer for viruses. my computer isnt cutting edge, and its amd haha, it gets thrugh that list in a couple ms max and no change in memory usage

uBlock's memory enhancements are for google chrome, google chrome is a memory hog so it makes sense.

[patrickjdempsey]

You aren't the author, Extension Development is the wrong forum.

A few things:

A whole bunch of people seem to think this is the greatest thing since sliced bread, but as far as I can tell it's just another AdBlock Plus clone. It apparently has it's own internal guts for processing filters as well as it's own UI, but still uses AdBlock Plus filter subscriptions.

I have my doubts about memory use claims, but it's notoriously hard to test memory use on Firefox extensions. And some of the wording on the uBlock website makes me wonder if they are just testing cold start-up memory and not actual working memory in making those claims:

https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/ ... ntly%29-do

"µBlock has a smaller memory footprint than Ghostery or Disconnect."

No it doesn't. Last time I checked, µBlock has a larger memory footprint than both Ghostery and Disconnect. That's for their own memory footprint. I didn't look into their contributions to the memory footprint added to each web page.

There's also reports on the Github of a big memory leak on Chrome when accessing the UI. So apparently memory use claims don't take into account actually interacting with the extension UI.

[AnimaliX]

O_O yikes, if going through a simple list like that is taking your memory to 1gb i think you need to check your computer for viruses. my computer isnt cutting edge, and its amd haha, it gets thrugh that list in a couple ms max and no change in memory usage

uBlock's memory enhancements are for google chrome, google chrome is a memory hog so it makes sense.

well total allocation 1GB and more memory with easylist on 64bit system is pretty normal... look at https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock#memory
or you can try simply google https://www.google.com/search?q=firefox+adblock+memory
...and ofcourse you must use something different than Windows Task Manager if you want to see total memory consumation

[patrickjdempsey]

well total allocation 1GB and more memory with easylist on 64bit system is pretty normal... look at https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock#memory

According to those charts... only if you are using Chrome or Safari LOL!

[AnimaliX]

well total allocation 1GB and more memory with easylist on 64bit system is pretty normal... look at https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock#memory

According to those charts... only if you are using Chrome or Safari LOL!

what i saw in Firefox case is mentioned only "explicit allocation" which may be half of "overall memory footprint" in my experience
as i say before... if you want to know real consumation use something like Process Explorer

[rsx11m]

Moving to Tech given that it's a rather general discussion.

[Noitidart]

"explicit allocation" which may be half

that "may be half" is a BIG "may be", i highly recommend you do a virus scan. I dont get near 1gb. total, thats all firefox processes (plugin container etc) combined. my taskmanager shows it at around 600k.

maybe flash, check that out, flash has been having a lot of bugs lately.

[patrickjdempsey]

Meh. Use what you want. AdBlock Plus has been doing the job for me for almost a decade, and like I said, uBlock and all the rest depend on the filter subscriptions infrastructure that ABP makes possible.

[patrickjdempsey]

that "may be half" is a BIG "may be", i highly recommend you do a virus scan. I dont get near 1gb. total, thats all firefox processes (plugin container etc) combined. my taskmanager shows it at around 600k.

maybe flash, check that out, flash has been having a lot of bugs lately.

The only time I find myself topping a gig is playing Flash video, which lately appears to be causing a memory leak... but only sometimes, on certain videos. And that is on a 64-bit W7 system.

It's possible there's another extension causing that memory leak...

[malliz]

Or maybe its a Cyberfox problem.

[barbaz]

ABP isn't a horrible memory hog in all cases. I'm using my own fork of ABP (largely based on a cross between ABP 2.1.2 & ABP 2.4), which doesn't have all the optimizations that ABP currently has, and even with 14 filter subscriptions and 602 custom filters, my SeaMonkey is using about 300-400 MB RAM total.
(about:addons-memory shows about 32 MB for my ABP-fork.)

Of course, the flip side of this is that things stored in RAM are stored there because RAM is quickly accessible, so at some point less memory usage means worse performance...

Wonder why some people's RAM gets chewed up more than others?

[AnimaliX]

this discussion goes completely unwanted direction (i definitely did not want to know the opinions from sworn users of ABP)
and if someone argue with numbers from task manager or about:addons-memory ...then there is nothing to add

ps. and yes, i have a virus!... last back in 1998