Hi Jet,
Extracting the snapshot from the GFx layer has not been explored yet. I
think we discussed this in the context of the time it takes to create
the snapshots. Since this will be handled off the main thread (bug
817700) we expect a pretty good performance there. I believe we would
still incur the memory cost however to store the snapshots. Do I recall
this conversation correctly?
The limit of 20 snapshots is currently per window (not per tab). In bug
839549, I'd like to switch to a WeakMap to store the snapshots and make
the limit of 20 global to all windows. I'm not very familiar with the
Trace Malloc MaxHeap tests, but if they use lots of windows, it may
explain a jump of 20% in memory utilization and I may have to address
bug 839549 sooner than later.
I hope this clarifies things.
-Stephen
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Increase in memory utilization on Mac OSX 10.7+ due to
history swipe animations
From: Jet Villegas <j...@mozilla.com>
To: Stephen Pohl <sp...@mozilla.com>
Cc: dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
Date: 2/12/13 3:29 PM
Stephen:
We talked about extracting this snapshot from the GFx Layers. Have you explored
that possibility? Taking the screencap from the raster data we already paint
should help here. BTW, 20 seems to be a very high number to cache per tab. The
biggest problem I'd like to solve is that I often accidentally swipe back, and
that's almost always just 1 page back.
--Jet
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen Pohl" <sp...@mozilla.com>
To: dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 2:11:12 PM
Subject: Increase in memory utilization on Mac OSX 10.7+ due to history swipe
animations
Hi,
I wanted to give a heads up that we're in the process of finalizing the
patch for bug 678392 which will give us history swipe animations on Mac
OSX 10.7+. Since we will be taking snapshots of the 20 most-recently
visited pages, this will undoubtedly lead to an increase in memory
utilization on these platforms.
There is a discussion about experimental memory measurements in comment
305 and 309 in the bug:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=678392#c305
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=678392#c309
We attempted to land the patch late last week but ran into test failures
caused (most-likely) by not forcing a clobber. The upside of it is that
it gave us feedback from Talos and an opportunity to email the list for
feedback before making another attempt at landing the patch. The "Trace
Malloc MaxHeap" regression is documented in this graph:
http://graphs.mozilla.org/graph.html#tests=[[29,63,22]]&sel=1360274365000,1360447165000&displayrange=7&datatype=running
We'd like to make sure that this increase is acceptable before landing
the patch. If you have any feedback, please let me know.
Thanks,
Stephen
_______________________________________________
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
_______________________________________________
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
