Re: Improving performance: RAM or CPU speed
John Hasler wrote: > That's probably it. Mozilla probably only want to support automatic > profile import one version back. I think to recall there was a statement that since version xxx it is default to create a new profile. There is no restriction to one version back.
Re: Improving performance: RAM or CPU speed
I wrote: > How often do you upgrade? I often go for months without doing so: > that may be why it happens to me. Celejar writes: > I usually upgrade as soon as a new version is available That's probably it. Mozilla probably only want to support automatic profile import one version back. I still don't see why the dialog can't offer the choice of importing some or all of my old profiles right up front. Surely that's what most people (even Windows users) want. However, I'm too lazy to send in a patch... -- John Hasler jhas...@newsguy.com Elmwood, WI USA
Re: Improving performance: RAM or CPU speed
On Mon, 13 Apr 2020 10:43:29 -0500 John Hasler wrote: > Celejar writes: > > I seem to have memory leaks with recent Firefox (currently 74.0.1-1 > > from Sid) - memory use goes slowly but steadily up, and eventually > > gets maxed out and the system grinds to a halt. It takes a while for > > this to happen, but I find myself eventually needing to kill and > > restart Firefox. > > I see this too sometimes. Top tells me which "Web Content" process is > gobbling memory: killing it solves the problem (and closes the offending > tab). > > I wrote: > > irritation of being required to create a new profile every time I > > upgrade Firefox). > > > Interesting - apparently some people get this, but some don't (I > > update regularly from the Sid repos, and I don't generally see this). > > How often do you upgrade? I often go for months without doing so: that > may be why it happens to me. I usually upgrade as soon as a new version is available (despite your oft-reiterated suggestion that this sort of thing is really unnecessary ;)) Celejar
Re: Improving performance: RAM or CPU speed
Celejar writes: > I seem to have memory leaks with recent Firefox (currently 74.0.1-1 > from Sid) - memory use goes slowly but steadily up, and eventually > gets maxed out and the system grinds to a halt. It takes a while for > this to happen, but I find myself eventually needing to kill and > restart Firefox. I see this too sometimes. Top tells me which "Web Content" process is gobbling memory: killing it solves the problem (and closes the offending tab). I wrote: > irritation of being required to create a new profile every time I > upgrade Firefox). > Interesting - apparently some people get this, but some don't (I > update regularly from the Sid repos, and I don't generally see this). How often do you upgrade? I often go for months without doing so: that may be why it happens to me. -- John Hasler jhas...@newsguy.com Elmwood, WI USA
Re: Improving performance: RAM or CPU speed
On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 10:21:42 -0500 John Hasler wrote: > rhkramer writes: > > When I have as few as 10 to 15 tabs open on the Firefox on my Jessie > > system, Firefox crashes (I mentioned in a previous post in this thread > > having a thousand or more tabs "open" in Firefox on Wheezy with > > minimal problems -- yes occasional crashes (maybe once every 2 to 4 > > weeks?), but I couldn't come near that on Jessie, and I expect the > > same problem on Buster. > > What Firefox version? I used to see frequent Firefox crashes > (apparently memory leaks: my system is always up) but that stopped a few > years ago (though the irritation of that has been replaced by the I seem to have memory leaks with recent Firefox (currently 74.0.1-1 from Sid) - memory use goes slowly but steadily up, and eventually gets maxed out and the system grinds to a halt. It takes a while for this to happen, but I find myself eventually needing to kill and restart Firefox. > irritation of being required to create a new profile every time I > upgrade Firefox). Interesting - apparently some people get this, but some don't (I update regularly from the Sid repos, and I don't generally see this). Celejar
Re: Improving performance: RAM or CPU speed
Andrei writes: > How do you upgrade / from where do you get the packages? (apt, > manually installed deb, etc.) Apt from Debian/Sid. Just did it a couple of days ago. -- John Hasler jhas...@newsguy.com Elmwood, WI USA
Re: Improving performance: RAM or CPU speed
On Sb, 11 apr 20, 18:43:38, John Hasler wrote: > David Wright writes: > > What sort of upgrade? Just the regular security fixes (which seem to > > be quite frequent recently), or point-releases, or what? And what > > parts of your profile do you lose? Bookmarks, cookies (like the ones > > you might want to keep for logins) or what? > > Upstream releases (these evidently happen about every fifteen minutes > but I only upgrade every few months or so). How do you upgrade / from where do you get the packages? (apt, manually installed deb, etc.) Kind regards, Andrei -- http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Improving performance: RAM or CPU speed
David Wright writes: > What sort of upgrade? Just the regular security fixes (which seem to > be quite frequent recently), or point-releases, or what? And what > parts of your profile do you lose? Bookmarks, cookies (like the ones > you might want to keep for logins) or what? Upstream releases (these evidently happen about every fifteen minutes but I only upgrade every few months or so). I don't lose anything. I just have to go through a silly song and dance to import my old profile (which took a bit of research to discover as I have never made use of the multiple profiles feature). It's not clear to me why importing profiles when upgrading should require any user input, especially when there is only one profile. -- John Hasler jhas...@newsguy.com Elmwood, WI USA
Re: Improving performance: RAM or CPU speed
I wrote: > What Firefox version? I used to see frequent Firefox crashes > (apparently memory leaks: my system is always up) but that stopped a few > years ago (though the irritation of that has been replaced by the > irritation of being required to create a new profile every time I > upgrade Firefox). deloptes writes: > but you can also import and activate your old profile That's what I'm talking about. The process consists essentially of creating a new profile and importing the old one into it. A pointless song and dance that Firefox could do automatically in the background. At the very least they could offer a simple dialog along the lines of "Which of these old profiles do you wish to import?" There was no warning when they started doing this. The first time it hit I was told that I should import my old profile via my nonexistent "Firefox account". Not going to happen. -- John Hasler jhas...@newsguy.com Elmwood, WI USA
Re: Improving performance: RAM or CPU speed
On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 10:21:42 -0500 John Hasler wrote: > What Firefox version? I used to see frequent Firefox crashes > (apparently memory leaks: my system is always up) but that stopped a > few years ago (though the irritation of that has been replaced by the > irritation of being required to create a new profile every time I > upgrade Firefox) My firefox profile is never lost. I copy my .mozilla directory and take that with me to another town. On the PC there I replace my .mozilla directory and start firefox: Result: Everything is restored: history, bookmarks, settings, logins/passwords, even the open tabs. When I return to my town I take with me my new up to date .mozilla directory. Firefox is a very convenient browser nowadays. I do not take my entire home directory with me, for some reasons. PS. I believe you have to use the same version of firefox on both machines for this to work.
Re: Improving performance: RAM or CPU speed
On Sat 11 Apr 2020 at 10:21:42 (-0500), John Hasler wrote: > rhkramer writes: > > When I have as few as 10 to 15 tabs open on the Firefox on my Jessie > > system, Firefox crashes (I mentioned in a previous post in this thread > > having a thousand or more tabs "open" in Firefox on Wheezy with > > minimal problems -- yes occasional crashes (maybe once every 2 to 4 > > weeks?), but I couldn't come near that on Jessie, and I expect the > > same problem on Buster. > > What Firefox version? I used to see frequent Firefox crashes > (apparently memory leaks: my system is always up) but that stopped a few > years ago (though the irritation of that has been replaced by the > irritation of being required to create a new profile every time I > upgrade Firefox). What sort of upgrade? Just the regular security fixes (which seem to be quite frequent recently), or point-releases, or what? And what parts of your profile do you lose? Bookmarks, cookies (like the ones you might want to keep for logins) or what? It's just that I've been using the same two profiles (two users) for years. I've copied them from machine to machine as my principal workstation has changed, and I copy them to other machines so that I don't have to find lots of websites I use fairly regularly. (They gradually diverge, of course, from the canonical copy on my principal workstation.) Some of the files in the profiles are pretty ancient and obviously were converted into other formats but not cleaned up. I mean, what do these do? 1592146 Jul 8 2013 urlclassifier.pset 54059008 Jul 8 2013 urlclassifier3.sqlite 7099 Feb 25 2013 sessionstore-2.js 101823 Jan 14 2013 xpti.dat 151170 Jan 14 2013 compreg.dat 1024 May 7 2012 old-pluginreg.dat 29034 Apr 18 2012 sessionstore-1.js 16384 Aug 22 2011 secmod.db Cheers, David.
Re: Improving performance: RAM or CPU speed (was: Re: New RAM, does Debian has a tool to benchmark?)
rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > RAM is still (to me) the most cost effective upgrade to an existing > system. yes this is true, but the bottle neck could be the cache or the disk IO. If you have slow disk, RAM can be advantage. If it is the cache, may be it is time to upgrade the system (cpu and/or mainboard). For me personally the most impressive boost was the SSD. I do not have any CPU or RAM hungry applications - except when compiling but this is done on a server, so the desktop is not affected. 8GB RAM is sufficient for the desktop. If I put another 4 or 8 it will consume them with time as well. This is what modern Linux kernel does. It will free memory whenever it needs. But I would not have big addvantage. On the PC I call "the server" I started with 16, but because of running virtualizations I upgraded to 32.
Re: Improving performance: RAM or CPU speed
John Hasler wrote: > What Firefox version? I used to see frequent Firefox crashes > (apparently memory leaks: my system is always up) but that stopped a few > years ago (though the irritation of that has been replaced by the > irritation of being required to create a new profile every time I > upgrade Firefox). but you can also import and activate your old profile https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/profile-manager-create-remove-switch-firefox-profiles
Re: Improving performance: RAM or CPU speed
rhkramer writes: > When I have as few as 10 to 15 tabs open on the Firefox on my Jessie > system, Firefox crashes (I mentioned in a previous post in this thread > having a thousand or more tabs "open" in Firefox on Wheezy with > minimal problems -- yes occasional crashes (maybe once every 2 to 4 > weeks?), but I couldn't come near that on Jessie, and I expect the > same problem on Buster. What Firefox version? I used to see frequent Firefox crashes (apparently memory leaks: my system is always up) but that stopped a few years ago (though the irritation of that has been replaced by the irritation of being required to create a new profile every time I upgrade Firefox). -- John Hasler jhas...@newsguy.com Elmwood, WI USA
Re: Improving performance: RAM or CPU speed (was: Re: New RAM, does Debian has a tool to benchmark?)
On Saturday, April 11, 2020 09:39:06 AM deloptes wrote: > rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > > I think my bottleneck these days is again RAM > Look at the L1 L2 L3 cache. Many people underestimate this > > here are two examples from different pcs > > # lscpu | grep cache > L1d cache: 16K > L1i cache: 64K > L2 cache:2048K > L3 cache:8192K > > > # lscpu | grep cache > L1d cache: 32K > L1i cache: 32K > L2 cache:256K > L3 cache:6144K Thanks for the reply -- interesting. Two of my machines (Wheezy and Buster) don't have L3 cache, my Jessie machine does. I see varying definitions / explanations of L3 cache -- some say it is on the CPU die, and some say it is on the motherboard (but, in either case, one level further away from the CPU(s) (mcow).) And, also in either case, not easy to upgrade short of replacing the CPU or motherboard. RAM is still (to me) the most cost effective upgrade to an existing system. (I guess I could mention that I don't play games, so video performance is not a key for me (and, when I do / did play. games, video performance was not a key -- games like FreeCiv and such). I am considering a new machine at this time, a laptop with a good docking system (I'm looking for one with a USB-C port) so that I can easily undock it and take it to meetings, but use it at home for development with GCC 8 (or high 7) -- I want to do some work on a program (scintilla) that now uses features of C++ versions 11, 14, and 17. (And I was thinking of taking the laptop to meetings where I might get help, but who knows when any such meetings will take place again.) (I actually bought a machine (mail order that advertised a USB-C port but have to return it as it doesn't have a USB-C port.) I guess I should say that I don't have objectional performance with any of the machines I have -- well, maybe I should take that back -- I keep the Wheezy system as my daily driver for several reasons -- including laziness, but also it seems better performance with kmail and firefox. When I have as few as 10 to 15 tabs open on the Firefox on my Jessie system, Firefox crashes (I mentioned in a previous post in this thread having a thousand or more tabs "open" in Firefox on Wheezy with minimal problems -- yes occasional crashes (maybe once every 2 to 4 weeks?), but I couldn't come near that on Jessie, and I expect the same problem on Buster. I guess that is all related to Wirth's law (and variations, Gates', ...).
Re: Improving performance: RAM or CPU speed (was: Re: New RAM, does Debian has a tool to benchmark?)
rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> I think my bottleneck these days is again RAM, on my daily driver I have
> 16 GB, but sometimes have 1000 or more tabs "open" in Firefox (on Wheezy).
> ("Open" is a little misleading -- occasionally Firefox crashes. When it
> does, I restart it and choose the option to restore all tabs (or whatever
> it says), the old tabs show up with their names, but the content from
> those URLS is not actually loaded (or fetched) until I click on one of
> those tabs to view it again.
Look at the L1 L2 L3 cache. Many people underestimate this
here are two examples from different pcs
# lscpu | grep cache
L1d cache: 16K
L1i cache: 64K
L2 cache:2048K
L3 cache:8192K
# lscpu | grep cache
L1d cache: 32K
L1i cache: 32K
L2 cache:256K
L3 cache:6144K
Improving performance: RAM or CPU speed (was: Re: New RAM, does Debian has a tool to benchmark?)
On Saturday, April 11, 2020 05:45:56 AM Tixy wrote:
> On Fri, 2020-04-10 at 20:01 -0700, David Christensen wrote:
> > My laptop is maxed out at 2 GB. If I open more than a few browser
> > windows with heavy JavaScript, the computer slows to a snail's pace.
>
> Would the amount of RAM affect browser JavaScript performance? Is that
> due to JIT compiler results not being able to be cached or something
> like that? I've just assumed slow performance it due to CPU throughput.
Back in the old days (when I found my computers slower than I liked), I found
that adding more RAM was usually a better approach to improving performance
than getting a faster CPU. Not sure how to quantify that, but I like to have
at least 12 GB in any computer I use.
That was especially true when CPUs started to reach the point (around 3 GHz.,
iirc) that their improvement in speed slowed down. (But it was also true
before that.)
If I had a computer that I was dissatisfied with the performance, I would
definitely add RAM to try to get up to 16 GB or so. Only then would I think
about getting a faster CPU.
Aside: The idea of extra cores sounds good to me, but I don't know how much
software actually takes advantage of this (or if the OSs / kernels) are
typically smart enough to distribute tasks across multiple cores -- I hope
they are, but really haven't been paying attention.
I think my bottleneck these days is again RAM, on my daily driver I have 16
GB, but sometimes have 1000 or more tabs "open" in Firefox (on Wheezy).
("Open" is a little misleading -- occasionally Firefox crashes. When it does,
I restart it and choose the option to restore all tabs (or whatever it says),
the old tabs show up with their names, but the content from those URLS is not
actually loaded (or fetched) until I click on one of those tabs to view it
again.
(Actually sort of a nice feature -- it lets me keep easy access to lots of
pages without filling up RAM.)
