Recommended Posts

Ok this is what I need. If you guys can post exact steps to reproduce memory leaks please post the exact steps to reproduce eg.. Url to the site, what you did on the site (like right clicked and opened 20 pictures in tabs or new windows, or right clicked and saved to my hard drive) and how much memory was being used. Please do not post if you are not using Firefox 1.5 or older because the bugs will not be fixed in those releases...need to make sure the leaks are in the current releases.

Please do not post here to complain about your memory issues! All I want is the steps to reproduce them

Helpful posts:

1) URL

2) What you was doing and steps to reproduce

3) Memory being used

4) Build ID via Help->About Firefox

Not helpful:

1) Not using Firefox 1.5 or newer (Newer=Branch builds, 1.5.0.1 test build, trunk builds)

2) Trolling saying firefox sux or the like (Will be reported)

3) No steps to reproduce, need at least the URL

Thanks!

EDIT: Forgot to mention why I need this. I got some tools to trace leaks in Firefox and hopefully I can disect these leaks and get em fixed.

Edited by supernova_00
Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/420311-firefox-memory-leaks/
Share on other sites

Embedded videos and flash use up more memory than they should. Firefox retains most of the files or plugin data even after the page is closed. Starting with 35mb, my memory usage went up to 100mb after playing a few embedded videos (putfile.com, video.google.com, etc) and flash movies. With the video pages now closed, no more movies loaded, memory usage is still 91mb with one browser window open (this reply).

The way Firefox retains certain data should definitely be looked at. I think it is one thing that contributes to the "memory leaks."

I've been trying out those sites all night and some of this morning and can't get firefox to leak. Do you have any extensions installed that interact with these videos in any way? Adblock, getflash, flashblock, and plugins for obscure players other then wmp.

Thing is, if the extensions are the ones leaking...we really can't do anything to fix those except the users can notify the extension authors.

EDIT: Managed to find memory leaking with software update and customizing the toolbar. :) Sofware update memory leak is when you upgrade and select 'Later' to restart later after upgrading and you continue to surf.

Customize bug is just opening the customize pallet and closing it.

No leaks there. High memory due to fast back navigation. Go through all 8 pages (i have neowin show me 40 posts per page) then look at memory useage, then go to yahoo, google, msn, hotmail, ebay then look at the ram useage...it droped from around 117mb to around 30. Firefox makes use of fast back navigation where it caches last 5 pages shown in that tab.

I'd like to see someone who does see these ultra-high memory situations install the trunk and create a new profile and install the extensions they normally do, and then see if it still happens. If it does, then we can get them to log and see if what they're seeing really is a leak, or just memory usage.

Coz I sure as hell can't repo these OMG FIREFOX USES A GAZILLION MB OF MEMORY complaints.

Exactly! All these people complain but no one posts the site that they say happened on, or give steps to reproduce. Plus they have about 50 extensions so no wonder there is a leak somewhere from these half finished code extensions installed especially the people that bump the maxversions and the extension still use some old outdated code that slows stuff down and probably causes the memory leaks in the first place.

BTW the reason I did post link to the tools, build and steps to install of the stuff needed to check for leaks is because its too complicated for most to understand and a million bugs would be filed in firefox and they really wouldnt be true bugs because the user did not have a fresh clean profile, no extensions or themes, homepage set to about:blank, go to the website that they thing is leaking, then close firefox and run the perl script over the log. then try to reproduce if they think they found a link. All they would do is file a bug saying firefox sux because it used 100mb ram on XXX page and they have a list of 30 extensions installed, didn't clean the cache first, and was surfing all day before they ran the script.

Ya... think that the 1.5 have maybe a leek... not sure...

In normal time back in the 1.0.7 times it was using way less memory,

I didn't see that before since i'm actually with 1GB of RAM ratter than 512MB.

But when I was browsing Neowin normally I was about 70MB RAM.

Now at the time I write this message it take 187MB (176MB Virtual)

Build ID: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows AM 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8) Gecko/20051111 Firefox/1.5

Well, I will close FF and try to look where it use lot of memory...

It can't use that from the start heh?

NI3NOR: Firefox 1.5 will use more memory because of the new fastback cache feature. Caches last 5 pages you visited in each tab. Disable that feature if you think firefox is using too much memory and you dont normally or care about a little bit faster back/forward navigation

NI3NOR: Firefox 1.5 will use more memory because of the new fastback cache feature. Caches last 5 pages you visited in each tab. Disable that feature if you think firefox is using too much memory and you dont normally or care about a little bit faster back/forward navigation

heh? indeed this can be usefull but i'm a guy that like to have 15 tabs... you see and i'm browsing lot of Pictures sites...

Where I can disable this in about:config ?

I did not even have that preference in my about:config, so I had to add it. Hopefully this will cut down on the memory usage. At any given time, Firefox uses about 60MB of memory. It probably has to do with themes and extensions and such, but I only have a few extensions loaded (ForecastFox, Adblock, and a few other small ones for convenience tasks like Paste And Go).

-- OxygenOne

Eww...

Ya, this option wasn't here, so I had created it and put it at 0

now browsing like a RoadRunner on some sites to check the Ram and still high for me....

142MB RAM (131MB Vir)

Offtopic:

You should add a little guide to about:config in your site,

and finally put an option screen to your extention toolbar cleenup ^^ (I HATE to hide my searchbar... but the rest is nice...)

I put in the faq about high memory useage, which points to a great thread on mozillazine...should read that.

I really want to put an options menu in my extension but I've tried and failed to get it working. I've asked for help on mozillazine and here but no one voluntered :( but thats for another topic.

EDIT: btw make sure you restarted after you added that entry to about:config

I always forgot to mention to disable prefetch. It loads everylink into the cache incase you click on the link the page will load faster. If your on a page with links to lots of pics no wonder why your get high memory useage. I feel that people that use fastback cache + prefectcing are the ones suffering the most.

'network.prefetch-next' is the entry

I often do alot of browsing, and today i had 50+ tabs open at one time, each page holding multiple frames. Those pages holds alot of images and text but I often close them after 20 secs. The main problem is that Firefox keeps the stuff in memory instead of writing it to the cache. Clearing your private data seems to help alot on the memory useage, but doesn't unload it all. (today firefix suddently went up to 1GB+ memory useage but i only have 512 mb ram.)

I have prefetch disabled.

I don't know if this could be related to a memory leak, but Gmail notifier often crash Firefox just after you received a mail and click the button to open your gmail inbox (before the toaster window is gone)

Thanks for the FAQ link... reading about it right now...

Sorry to don't help you that mush with your search of memory leaks...

BUT! AdBlock is T3H **** MEMORY LEAKER! *yells at it*

Actually I think I have save 100MB ( !!! ) by reading the FAQ and of course REMOVE adblock in order to put Adblock Plus!

(And now i don't feel guilty... I have a White list for good site to just "hide" thiere Ads WOOT!)

Edit: Just to inform that it use actually 78MB (67MB Vir)

After another rought browsing in DA/NW - Desktop Thread/Some random search in Google Image...

it's really nicer...

supernova_00,

You have helped me too. :) Setting network.prefetch-next to false seems to help release memory and virtual memory after having employed the extension Browse Images, which uses a lot of those two. Curiously enough the memory and virtual memory do not get released after having loaded and gone away from a page with many images using only firefox, and not Browse Images. But I've read that firefox itself has issues with displaying images, so I suspected it. I'm sure the firefox team is looking into this, and I wish them (you?) good luck!

Again, thanks!

(Sorry for not providing an url, but it happens on every page with many images, and I also thought that my gratitude would make up for the lack of an url. :) )

? Artifex ?

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • It STILL has horrid theme support. Hard to look at for me. The white is too bright, and the black too dark. I'm using classic outlook for the Dark Grey theme. It's just right for me.
    • inb4 someone leaves the usual "what an unfortunate name" comment
    • Cuktech 10 Ultra charger review: big display, four ports, 110W total power by Taras Buria Cuktech recently announced a couple of Ultra-branded chargers, including a desktop 300W charger, which I reviewed a few weeks ago. For those who do need that much (or who do not want to spend that much on a charger), Cuktech also offers the 10 Ultra, a traditional wall charger with similar features. Four ports, a big display, and up to 110W of power output. After using it for a few weeks, here are my impressions. Disclaimer: Cuktech provided the review unit without any editorial input or pre-approval. Like the 30 Ultra, the 10 Ultra arrived in a box made of nice cardboard with quality print all over it. Inside, besides the charger, you will find a 240W 6A charger, which, this time, is fully braided. While Cuktech always bundles high-power cables with its chargers and power banks, they are usually regular and unassuming. This time, the cable is much nicer, matching the charger's $59.99 price tag. The charger itself measures 67 x 76 x 33 mm or 2.6 x 3.0 x 1.3 inches and weighs about 250 grams. Considering the charger has four ports and a big display, I would say the compact size is quite impressive, albeit a little hefty. The overall design is similar to other chargers from the manufacturer, minus the chrome Cuktech logo next to the four ports. The Cuktech 10 Ultra has retractable prongs for better portability. Its front side is covered with piano black plastic housing two elements: a capacitive button with backlight and a quite large display for various charging stats. Ports are downward-facing, and I have mixed feelings about such a design. It is not the most convenient when you frequently connect and disconnect cables. It makes you bend over to find the right port to connect, and it is a no-go with outlets mounted closer to the floor. On the bright side, design like this eliminates clutter and sagging, especially when using four cables at once. Plus, you get plenty of space for a big display. Ports include two high-speed USB Type-C ports, one Type-C for less demanding devices, and one classic USB Type-A. The first two ports deliver full 100W, while the third is capped at 45W. As for the Type-A port, its maximum output is 18W. In total, the charger delivers 110W of power, but in my testing, I managed to squeeze 117W when charging two power banks and a tablet. Quite impressive. Type-C1 Type-C2 Type-C3 Type-A Single-port 100W 100W 45W 18W Two ports 80W 20W - - Three ports 65W 20W 20W - Four ports 65W 20W 10W 10W The charger can detect handshake protocols and balance power across all four ports according to each device's needs. As such, power is not limited to the values in the table above. You can have two ports charging at 55W, three ports at 45W + 20W, and more. For some reason, Cuktech is not listing the supported protocols, but a quick test showed that it is compatible with PD3.0, PPS, QC5, DCP, and UFCS. When you connect a compatible device, the charger automatically detects its charging standard and displays it on the screen, for example, Apple 6A or Samsung 3A. Speaking of the screen. The main highlight of the 10 Ultra is its 1.57-inch display with a maximum brightness of 700 nits and 160-degree viewing angles. The display takes up most of the front, and it shows various charging-related information, including total output power, current temperature, power distribution across ports with watts, volts, and amps, a screensaver, and more. You can toggle between the different views by tapping the button, and holding it changes the screen orientation (portrait or horizontal, plus flipped) according to your socket position. The screen is very nice. It is sharp, vivid, and the fonts are easy to read. As for settings, you can change the following: Keep the screen on or off Lock the screen orientation (hold the button to change the screen orientation) Keep the USB Type-A port on Toggle power modes The charger has three power modes: AI: standard mode that automatically allocates power to each connected device. Power Priority: prioritizes power for high-demand devices, such as laptops or power banks. Balanced: splits power evenly across connected devices according to their needs I was skeptical at first, but after testing a few devices in different modes, I can see the benefit of these three modes. The most useful is power priority, which gives the first Type-C port more power. When I was charging a 100W power bank (port 1) alongside a 140W power bank (port 2), Power Priority split the total output about 75-30. Balanced mode, as the name suggests, splits the total output between the two ports more or less equally. As for AI mode, the charger uses its brain to detect which device needs more power. In my testing, it figured out that the 140W power needs a bit more juice. As I said, I expected this to be more of a gimmick, but the three built-in modes turned out quite useful. For example, you can prioritize your laptop while giving other ports a little less power, but still enough to charge at acceptable speeds. Unfortunately, unlike the 30 Ultra, this charger cannot display the battery level of the device being charged. This small feature turned out to be very useful when I was testing the 30 Ultra, as it allowed me to see my phone's battery level without picking it up. Like other Cuktech chargers I tested, the 10 Ultra one proved itself reliable and well-made. It uses Gallium nitride semiconductor technology to reduce the charger's size and improve efficiency. It is also better at dissipating heat, but I have to say that when charging two power banks at 117W total, the charger got hotter than what I would call comfortable (hold it for a few seconds, and you start feeling a burning sensation at your fingertips). However, the built-in thermal indicator remained below the temperature threshold, with the screen reassuring that the device operated at "High performance" (I tested it in a 21 °C / 69 °F room). Overall, the Cuktech 10 Ultra is a solid choice. If you need four ports and you like to nerd out on various stats, it is a very easy recommendation. It will take care of your laptop, phone, tablet, and power bank without breaking a sweat, plus the build, material, and cable quality are top-notch. The mode switcher is handy when charging different devices with different power needs, too. I cannot say a display is a must-have in a charger, especially when it makes you more conscious about where to plug it, but it is a neat addition if you have a socket at your table or bed level, so that you can actually use the display and its features. The more important fact is that despite its size and quality, the display does not make the charger that much more expensive than similarly powerful chargers from competitors. Plus, you can save 10% on the 10 Ultra with a promo code on Amazon. Buy Cuktech 10 Ultra charger - $53.99 on Amazon with a promo code As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • Last week I was investigating an issue with contacts and tried using the new Outlook. In the real (Classic) Outlook, you can easily go to any Outlook folder and present it in a Table View, then customize the columns to show/sort any field, which was exactly what I needed. But of course, the new Outlook doesn't have this feature at all. I gave up. Oh, and can we possibly stop claiming the new Outlook has PST support? What it really has is the ability to use the real Outlook in the background to pretend to have PST support. There is no PST support without the real Outlook installed.
    • Honestly just before Panos left it started to feel like MS just wasnt interested in them so they were being less innovative with them, and then when he DID leave for Amazon its kind of clear the direction is gone. It felt like Panos had both goals and drive, and a vision, but it felt like no matter what his title/department was the Surface devices never had the full interest of the rest of management and he was just pushing a bolder up a hill that MS was adding dirt to as he went.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      mobandz earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Apprentice
      fernan99 went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • One Month Later
      nothanks earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      B2Proxy earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Year In
      MadMung0 earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      477
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      247
    3. 3
      Skyfrog
      79
    4. 4
      FloatingFatMan
      76
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      60
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!