On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 01:41:45PM +0100, Richard Lewis wrote:
> Does anyone else find that Conkeror can be almost frustratingly slow
> and sluggish at times?
> 
> The things I notice most are: pages that take a while before either
> the follow command can be called or even any links clicked with the
> mouse; when it takes a long time between calling follow (pressing 'f')
> and the links on a page being highlighted; lag and delay in the
> minibuffer (I can often type a whole Google search term before the
> typed characters appear in the minibuffer).
> 
> The minibuffer slowness is probably the most frustrating. I'm using
> history rather than bookmarks for minibuffer completion. I appreciate
> that this is probably bound to be a lot slower, but it's almost
> infinitely more useful.
> 
> A potentially useful hack that I should have a go at is preventing it
> from remembering lots of history items which are similar but for their
> query strings (e.g. 20 entries for http://www.amazon.co.uk/?.... could
> be reduced to just one).
> 
> Is the root of the slowness the XULrunner/Gecko platform? I use
> XULrunner 1.9.1.9-7 (packaged in Debian) and a recent git version of
> Conkeror. I've noticed that if I run Conkeror in metacity (the GTK
> window manager) it's slightly less sluggish than when I run it in
> Fluxbox.
> 
> Any similar experiences?


The first thing to try would be a new profile.  To make a profile:

  conkeror -no-remote -ProfileManager

To use the new profile:

  conkeror -no-remote -P foo

The "-no-remote" switch is only needed if another instance of conkeror is
running.

-- 
John Foerch
_______________________________________________
Conkeror mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/conkeror

Reply via email to