Is there a Wiki or other current documentation on recommended non-default settings based on build, platform and system resources? I am running 64 bit SM 2.49.5 on linux mint 18.3 x64 cinnamon with 8GB of RAM and thus could probably take advantage of tuning SM use of memory.
Dave > Frank-Rainer Grahl wrote: SeaMonkey is using cache2 since 2.48. cache 1 is > gone. > > https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1241622 > > All settings are stock Gecko/Firefox settings unless changed manually. > > FRG > > > Dirk Munk wrote: >> Lee wrote: >>> On 2/28/19, Dirk Munk <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> I've set the following cache parameters with about:config : >>>> >>>> 1. browser.cache.use_new_backend = 1 (true) >>>> This activates a 'new' cache mechanism, that seems to be faster and >>>> more >>>> stable than the old one. It is unclear why this isn't the default >>>> setting. >>> It's a programmers' law: There is no fix as permanent as a >>> 'temporary' fix: >>> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=913806#c8 >>> >>> The pref that is enabled by default is >>> "browser.cache.use_new_backend_temp" >>> >>> I still have the defaults for >>> browser.cache.use_new_backend set to 0 >>> browser.cache.use_new_backend_temp set to true >>> And all my cache files are under the cache2 dir which agrees with >>> https://www.janbambas.cz/mozilla-firefox-new-http-cache-is-live/ >> >> Did you read this in that article: >> >> Enabling the new HTTP cache by default is planned for Q4/2013. >> >> I assume that Firefox is now using the 'new' cache as the only cache >> mechanism, so why shouldn't Seamonkey do that as well? >> >> >>> 1 – enable, use the brand new HTTP cache (files are stored under >>> cache2 directory in your profile) >>> >>> >>>> 2. browser.cache.memory.capacity = 4194304 (4 GB) >>>> This sets the *maximum* memory capacity of the cache to 4 GB. It does >>>> *not* mean that Seamonkey will always use 4 GB of cache memory, it >>>> merely means that the cache memory is allowed to grow up to 4 GB *if* >>>> Seamonkey needs it. For that to happen there must be many, many tabs >>>> open. >>> http://kb.mozillazine.org/Browser.cache.memory.capacity >> >> Did you read the table on that page? >> It says that using the -1 setting will give you a memory cache of 32 >> MB if your system has 8 GB or more RAM. >> The default setting for Seamonkey is 200 MB at the moment, I'm using 4 >> GB. >> That page was written in the dark ages. >> >>> For e-mail and newsgroups (i.e., Thunderbird and SeaMonkey), >>> messages for IMAP accounts are cached as well in either disk or memory >>> cache, unless synchronized locally already. This reduces the amount of >>> network activity to reload previously viewed messages. This preference >>> controls the maximum amount of memory to use for caching decoded >>> images, messages, and chrome items (application user interface >>> elements). >>> >>> Maybe if you haven't compacted your mail in a while & all the deleted >>> msgs are still in the file? Or you're looking at newsgroups with a >>> long retention period? Because it seems like the only web pages that >>> might need >10 MB of cache are if videos are cached. >> >> On the one hand it may be interesting to know why Seamonkey is using >> so much memory cache. On the other hand, I don't care. I want to use >> Seamonkey the way I'm using it. So I make the settings fit for my use. >> >>> >>> >>>> 3. browser.cache.disk.enable = 0 (false) >>>> This setting *disables* the disk cache. After I made this setting, >>>> Seamonkey became extremely fast compared with an active disk cache. >>>> However, keep in mind that you should only use this setting after >>>> increasing the memory capacity of the cache. >>> I still think it's a bad idea, but I don't have a gigabit speed >>> internet link or <10 millisecond response time to the web sites I >>> frequent like I recall somebody claiming they had. >> >> I think I have 300 Mb/sec download at the moment. >> >>> >>> https://lifehacker.com/speed-up-firefox-by-moving-your-cache-to-ram-no-ram-di-5687850 >>> >>> Update: One of the folks over at Mozilla laid out a few downsides to >>> using this method. It's not a bad idea, per se, but it's good to be >>> informed about what this does vs. the default settings (and how future >>> plans for Firefox will work with this tweak). >>> ---- links to >>> https://groups.google.com/forum/?_escaped_fragment_=msg/mozilla.dev.apps.firefox/nqYLKTsOAbs/Fh7XO2PVUn0J >>> >>> >>> Lee >> >> Again, that is an article from 2010!! >> >> But let's see if that article is still useful: >> >> 1. It will slow down plug-ins like Adobe reader. I don't notice that. >> >> 2. The size of the memory cache is capped at a much lower number. >> Perhaps with a 32 bit browser, but the standard size of the disk cache >> is 350 MB, I'm using 4 GB in memory!! >> >> 3. The disk cache persists across restarts. That is a horrible >> argument. If there is anything I hate, then it is taking junk from a >> previous session to a new session. When I was still using Windows 98, >> I often had the Blue Screen of Death. The stability of the system was >> greatly enhanced after I made a registry setting that cleaned the page >> file during the shutdown procedure.It's the same thing with Seamonkey. >> After Seamonkey crashed, I often deleted the profiles folder in >> appdata > local > Mozilla > Seamonkey. It made Seamonkey much more >> stable, since this folder also contains the disk cache. >> >> 4. I see no reason to use a disk cache if you have a proper memory >> cache. It's very simple, never do on disk what you can do in memory. >> _______________________________________________ support-seamonkey mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
