Re: All the processes

2017-03-06 Thread Nicholas Nethercote
On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 11:27 AM, wrote: > > Intuitively I don't grasp how each content process can add that much more memory that it would become a "major problem" jumping from 4 to 8 Simple: lots of stuff gets duplicated in each process. Efforts have been made to share

Re: All the processes

2017-03-06 Thread Kartikaya Gupta
On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 7:08 PM, Eric Rahm wrote: > I assume WebRenderer will have it's own process, but maybe that just gets > lumped in with the GPU process. WebRender will live in the GPU process, if there is one. The UI process otherwise. Cheers, kats

Re: All the processes

2017-03-06 Thread Andrew McCreight
a major problem. > > ... > > > Nick > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 11:15 AM, Nicholas Nethercote < > > n.neth...@gmail.com > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > &g

Re: All the processes

2017-03-06 Thread Eric Rahm
s is that it increases memory usage. Recent-ish measurements > showed > > that for e10s-multi we could probably go up to 4 content processes > without > > blowing it out too badly, but 8 would be a major problem. > ... > > Nick > > > > > > > > O

Re: All the processes

2017-03-06 Thread gsquelart
ly go up to 4 content processes without > blowing it out too badly, but 8 would be a major problem. ... > Nick > > > > On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 11:15 AM, Nicholas Nethercote <n.neth...@gmail.com > > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I want to understand all the di

Re: All the processes

2017-03-06 Thread Eric Rahm
It should be pretty easy to measure at a high level with ATSY [1], but I agree coordination on overall memory requirements before adding new processes would be useful. For more detailed breakdowns of memory usage we can depend on about:memory reports for content processes, we added support for

Re: All the processes

2017-03-06 Thread Nicholas Nethercote
On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 9:22 AM, Ben Kelly wrote: > These measurements are for full content processes. Many of the processes > in the above do not need all the chrome script we load in content processes > today. > That's good to know. But it would still be good to get

Re: All the processes

2017-03-06 Thread Bobby Holley
On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 2:22 PM, Ben Kelly wrote: > On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 5:12 PM, Nicholas Nethercote < > n.netherc...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Now for the reason I raised this: the major downside of using multiple > > processes is that it increases memory usage. Recent-ish

Re: All the processes

2017-03-06 Thread Kris Maglione
On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 09:12:55AM +1100, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: Now for the reason I raised this: the major downside of using multiple processes is that it increases memory usage. Recent-ish measurements showed that for e10s-multi we could probably go up to 4 content processes without

Re: All the processes

2017-03-06 Thread Ben Kelly
On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 5:12 PM, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: > Now for the reason I raised this: the major downside of using multiple > processes is that it increases memory usage. Recent-ish measurements showed > that for e10s-multi we could probably go up to 4 content

Re: All the processes

2017-03-06 Thread Nicholas Nethercote
Hi, > > I want to understand all the different processes that we can and will have > in Firefox. Here's a list I constructed off the top of my head. > > - main process > > - content process(es): 1 on release for most users; 2 on Nightly > > - plugin process: just for Fla

Re: All the processes

2017-03-06 Thread Jared Hirsch
alf Of Nicholas > > Nethercote > > Sent: Friday, March 03, 2017 6:15 PM > > To: dev-platform <dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org> > > Subject: All the processes > > > > Hi, > > > > I want to understand all the different processes that we ca

RE: All the processes

2017-03-06 Thread jmathies
> -Original Message- > From: dev-platform [mailto:dev-platform- > bounces+jmathies=mozilla@lists.mozilla.org] On Behalf Of Nicholas > Nethercote > Sent: Friday, March 03, 2017 6:15 PM > To: dev-platform <dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org> > Subject: All th

Re: All the processes

2017-03-06 Thread Evelyn Hung
e media playback team are also working on moving the code that interacts > with the platforms' audio subsystem into its own process, but that project > has only recently started. > > cpearce. > > > > On Saturday, March 4, 2017 at 1:16:00 PM UTC+13, Nicholas Nethercote wr

Re: All the processes

2017-03-05 Thread Chris Pearce
with the platforms' audio subsystem into its own process, but that project has only recently started. cpearce. On Saturday, March 4, 2017 at 1:16:00 PM UTC+13, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: > Hi, > > I want to understand all the different processes that we can and will have > in Firefox. Her

Re: All the processes

2017-03-03 Thread Ben Kelly
On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 7:15 PM, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: > Do I have any of these details wrong? Have I missed any? > We plan to ship a "worker" process that will run ServiceWorker (and eventually SharedWorker) threads as part of:

Re: All the processes

2017-03-03 Thread Andrew McCreight
On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 4:15 PM, Nicholas Nethercote <n.netherc...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I want to understand all the different processes that we can and will have > in Firefox. Here's a list I constructed off the top of my head. > > - main process > > - con

Re: All the processes

2017-03-03 Thread Kris Maglione
On Sat, Mar 04, 2017 at 11:15:29AM +1100, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: Hi, I want to understand all the different processes that we can and will have in Firefox. Here's a list I constructed off the top of my head. - main process - content process(es): 1 on release for most users; 2 on Nightly

All the processes

2017-03-03 Thread Nicholas Nethercote
Hi, I want to understand all the different processes that we can and will have in Firefox. Here's a list I constructed off the top of my head. - main process - content process(es): 1 on release for most users; 2 on Nightly - plugin process: just for Flash now? - gfx compositor process (bug