Yes! 64-bit Firefox for Windows on its way

[Grantius]

@zoom314a Does about:memory show where the memory is going? Do you have any ghost-windows? I assume since you're calling it a leak that the memory sticks around even if you close all tabs (otherwise you might want to consider using a different word). If about:memory shows a high amount of heap-unclassified, you could try running with DMD, though you'd have to build the browser to do that.

Since I have no idea on how to use a compiler and no extra income to use buying a compiler, DMD can go to heck, I'm not a programmer and the link says the following about DMD in Win64.

DMD currently doesn't work properly on Win64; it gives empty stack traces and so the output is useless.

DMD in Win64 currently is a Wild Goose Chase...

Now I did the 'about:memory', I clicked on the left most button, called 'Measure' and the biggest is:

1,100.32 MB (34.79%) ++ (108 tiny)

This is composed of 108 tabs for websites, some are for banking and such, some are like here, and then there are the following 6:

├─────22.59 MB (00.71%) ++ top(chrome://browser/content/browser.xul, id=3)
├─────12.57 MB (00.40%) ++ top(none)/detached
├─────12.54 MB (00.40%) ++ top(about:memory, id=74398)
├──────1.55 MB (00.05%) ++ top(about:newtab, id=267)
├──────0.15 MB (00.00%) ++ top(about:blank, id=7)
└──────0.15 MB (00.00%) ++ top(about:blank, id=9)

Now 108 has become 112... Yeah I closed two tabs since I started this reply, I had a big furry interruption from the real world here, I have a big cat.

├──1,257.15 MB (35.95%) ++ (112 tiny)

├─────31.21 MB (00.89%) ++ top(none)
├─────29.12 MB (00.83%) ++ top(chrome://browser/content/browser.xul, id=3)
├──────1.48 MB (00.04%) ++ top(about:newtab, id=267)
├──────0.15 MB (00.00%) ++ top(about:blank, id=7)
└──────0.15 MB (00.00%) ++ top(about:blank, id=9)

Oh and for the record, memory leak is not My term, it's what everyone else calls it, since more and more memory is consumed by the browser, I have no real term for this.

I'm more concerned that the browser just keeps on getting bigger and bigger as the day wears on, with the crash that I know is coming, the oldest nightly x64 browser that I remember is Minefield, that one may or may not have had a leak(or whatever you'd like to call it), but then I don't know where Minefield fits in, outside of being a long time back.

As to the cause of the sluggishness, that could be a long story that may or may not mean a thing when it comes to the browser and might be a separate issue.

Uh mate that is not a memory leak. Unless you see like 1GB in "heap unclassified" or something else, it looks normal for having 100+ tabs open. I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make

[chriscjs]

...Oh and both Chrome and Opera that I have are 32bit, I've never seen a 64bit version of either and I've looked extensively.

https://www.google.com/chrome/browser/d ... index.html
Click on "Download Chrome for another platform" and you will find 64-bit Chrome for Windows.

Opera does not have a 64-bit version according to their forums.

I have been running 64-bit Firefox for a few months and have not seen the memory leaks or crashes you mention. I have 24 addons and its been quite stable for me.

Are there any specific web sites or URLs where this happens more often?

[winapp2]

What was the value and % of "heap-unclassified" as Ver Greeneyes asked... the value there would be the "leaked" memory ...

This is all that is mentioned of 'heap-unclassified' below, sorry but that's all folks.

WARNING: the 'heap-allocated' memory reporter does not work for this platform and/or configuration. This means that 'heap-unclassified' is not shown and the 'explicit' tree shows less memory than it should.

Was this in waterfox or firefox? I've never seen this message and I've used win7 x64 and nightly, so it sounds like you're either not using a mozilla build of firefox, or your profile/install is broken.

[zoom314a]

What was the value and % of "heap-unclassified" as Ver Greeneyes asked... the value there would be the "leaked" memory ...

This is all that is mentioned of 'heap-unclassified' below, sorry but that's all folks.

WARNING: the 'heap-allocated' memory reporter does not work for this platform and/or configuration. This means that 'heap-unclassified' is not shown and the 'explicit' tree shows less memory than it should.

Was this in waterfox or firefox? I've never seen this message and I've used win7 x64 and nightly, so it sounds like you're either not using a mozilla build of firefox, or your profile/install is broken.

This says I'm using Waterfox x64.

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/38.1.0 Waterfox/38.1.0

[zoom314a]

@zoom314a Does about:memory show where the memory is going? Do you have any ghost-windows? I assume since you're calling it a leak that the memory sticks around even if you close all tabs (otherwise you might want to consider using a different word). If about:memory shows a high amount of heap-unclassified, you could try running with DMD, though you'd have to build the browser to do that.

Since I have no idea on how to use a compiler and no extra income to use buying a compiler, DMD can go to heck, I'm not a programmer and the link says the following about DMD in Win64.

DMD currently doesn't work properly on Win64; it gives empty stack traces and so the output is useless.

DMD in Win64 currently is a Wild Goose Chase...

Now I did the 'about:memory', I clicked on the left most button, called 'Measure' and the biggest is:

1,100.32 MB (34.79%) ++ (108 tiny)

This is composed of 108 tabs for websites, some are for banking and such, some are like here, and then there are the following 6:

├─────22.59 MB (00.71%) ++ top(chrome://browser/content/browser.xul, id=3)
├─────12.57 MB (00.40%) ++ top(none)/detached
├─────12.54 MB (00.40%) ++ top(about:memory, id=74398)
├──────1.55 MB (00.05%) ++ top(about:newtab, id=267)
├──────0.15 MB (00.00%) ++ top(about:blank, id=7)
└──────0.15 MB (00.00%) ++ top(about:blank, id=9)

Now 108 has become 112... Yeah I closed two tabs since I started this reply, I had a big furry interruption from the real world here, I have a big cat.

├──1,257.15 MB (35.95%) ++ (112 tiny)

├─────31.21 MB (00.89%) ++ top(none)
├─────29.12 MB (00.83%) ++ top(chrome://browser/content/browser.xul, id=3)
├──────1.48 MB (00.04%) ++ top(about:newtab, id=267)
├──────0.15 MB (00.00%) ++ top(about:blank, id=7)
└──────0.15 MB (00.00%) ++ top(about:blank, id=9)

Oh and for the record, memory leak is not My term, it's what everyone else calls it, since more and more memory is consumed by the browser, I have no real term for this.

I'm more concerned that the browser just keeps on getting bigger and bigger as the day wears on, with the crash that I know is coming, the oldest nightly x64 browser that I remember is Minefield, that one may or may not have had a leak(or whatever you'd like to call it), but then I don't know where Minefield fits in, outside of being a long time back.

As to the cause of the sluggishness, that could be a long story that may or may not mean a thing when it comes to the browser and might be a separate issue.

Uh mate that is not a memory leak. Unless you see like 1GB in "heap unclassified" or something else, it looks normal for having 100+ tabs open. I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make

Waterfox displays this in red text:

WARNING: the 'heap-allocated' memory reporter does not work for this platform and/or configuration. This means that 'heap-unclassified' is not shown and the 'explicit' tree shows less memory than it should.

So the amounts are not to be trusted and DMD does not work in Win 64.

[avada]

@zoom314a Does about:memory show where the memory is going? Do you have any ghost-windows? I assume since you're calling it a leak that the memory sticks around even if you close all tabs (otherwise you might want to consider using a different word). If about:memory shows a high amount of heap-unclassified, you could try running with DMD, though you'd have to build the browser to do that.

It's still a leak if you don't close all tabs. When you do so the content processes are terminated. That's a surefire way to free up memory, but if you don't let the number of opened tabs go below the number of content processes the wasted memory is not freed.

[Ver Greeneyes]

Since I have no idea on how to use a compiler and no extra income to use buying a compiler, DMD can go to heck,

Why are you being so aggressive? You can download Visual Studio Community 2013 and everything else needed to compile Firefox on Windows for free.

I'm not a programmer and the link says the following about DMD in Win64.

Hmm, that note is probably out-of-date. The bug it links to is fixed.

Oh and for the record, memory leak is not My term, it's what everyone else calls it,

Fair enough, you were the one I saw calling it a 'big leak' but there's no reason to get hung up about it. In addition:

I'm more concerned that the browser just keeps on getting bigger and bigger as the day wears on,

Okay, if the browser keeps taking up more memory even if you're not using it, that does sound like a leak, though it may be a website that's constantly using up more and more memory - like an online IRC client with an infinite chat history, for instance. One thing you can try to narrow down the cause is to "Measure and save..." in about:memory after you've started the browser, then do it again after letting it sit and grow for a while. Then you can "Load and diff..." to see where the extra memory is going.

Waterfox displays this in red text:

WARNING: the 'heap-allocated' memory reporter does not work for this platform and/or configuration. This means that 'heap-unclassified' is not shown and the 'explicit' tree shows less memory than it should.

That's kind of worrying. I wonder what Waterfox are doing to break about:memory, but you could try it with 64-bit Nightly.

It's still a leak if you don't close all tabs. When you do so the content processes are terminated. That's a surefire way to free up memory, but if you don't let the number of opened tabs go below the number of content processes the wasted memory is not freed.

Yeah, I'm thinking of it in terms of dom.ipc.processCount == 1 and keeping at least one tab open, then "Minimize memory usage" before measuring in about:memory. If that keeps a lot of stuff alive, you'll probably see ghost-windows in about:memory or perhaps an add-on compartment using up a lot of memory.

[klappa]

Have they still not released a Firefox 64-bit version?

[KWierso]

Have they still not released a Firefox 64-bit version?

It's coming with the next release of Firefox, last I heard.

[James]

Have they still not released a Firefox 64-bit version?

It's coming with the next release of Firefox, last I heard.

The Win64 builds is still planned for Firefox 40.0 yes.

For reading see bugs 1180792 and 1181014 as there is no need to comment in either.

They will be on http://www.mozilla.org/firefox/all page only initially.

64-bit Firefox is not new as there has been 64-bit builds for Mac OSX (combined 32/64) and Linux since Firefox 4.0as they were both easier and needed especially.

[laszlo]

They've just decided to kill the 64-bit version before it has even left the starting blocks. This bug makes a large number of streaming and VOD services that require Silverlight unusable with Firefox Win64 right now, among them Netflix and Amazon.

The recent stream of not so clever decisions makes me think there's really nobody at the helm at Mozilla.

[NickJH]

Well M$ are dropping Silverlight from Win10/Edge so eventually those services will probably move to some other technology.

[laszlo]

Eventually, that will happen. But what about making such changes when it has happened (in a way that is compatible with Firefox), and not months or even a year before? Many of those sites already support HTML5, but only for Chrome, funnily. And before we forget that, there still is a Firefox version that supports Silverlight... which will be a lame excuse for everybody not to change anything.

And by the way, Microsoft doesn't drop Silverlight from Windows 10, only from Edge, and for cases like this they're clever enough to include Internet Explorer, which will still be the top Microsoft browser for quite some time.

The funny thing is, Mozilla wanted to include Silverlight in the beginning, until they decided to rather be lazy and leave it out. The big question is also, why not be consequent and throw out Flash, too, while they're at it, because it's the single biggest attack vector for PCs and nobody uses it for anything serious anymore anyway? Oh right, Edge has Flash built-in. Microsoft is just daft, too, and Mozilla is desperately playing catch-up since years instead of being innovative.

[avada]

Okay, I didn't know they disabled practically all plugins outside flash... (For win64 only?)
Is there a way to whitelist some of them?

[streetwolf]

Just noticed too that some of my plugins are missing. No more Foxit PDF plugin nor some Windows Office 2013 plugins (never really knew what these did).