On Tuesday 30 January 2007 05:06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Does the app need to run on the thin client? As Xavier pointed out > > FireFox is a memory pig and I found that normal desktops running FireFox > > will kill a thin client that does not have a lot of RAM. > > > > I running ViceWM for all terminal desktops and it keeps the FireFox > > memory load on the server. If your XUL app does not need to use local > > devices then maybe ViceWM will do the trick. > > I still don't understand fully, firefox is running on the fatclient but > takes a lot of memory on the thinclient ?
My limited testing showed 'firefox needs lots of memory', fat client, thin client, stand-alone. If you google you will see sensible motivation for this behaviour and benchmarks about browsers. So I use thin clients with 256M and no swap and stay away from sites that crash the client. There is no benefit in running firefox as a local-app! If ViceWM keeps the memory load on the server then all rendering is done on the server resulting in crappy display performance and high network usage all the time for every ViceVM client James ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _____________________________________________________________________ Ltsp-discuss mailing list. To un-subscribe, or change prefs, goto: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltsp-discuss For additional LTSP help, try #ltsp channel on irc.freenode.net
