| 1 |
On 09/19/10 18:08, Alan McKinnon wrote: |
| 2 |
>> Firefox 4 indeed is smoother (probably due to the new animations, |
| 3 |
>> probably because none of the plugins I used are compatible yet, but |
| 4 |
>> maybe it is just faster); but it is definitely more memory hungrier than |
| 5 |
>> before. In Fx3, it usually took around ~20-25% of my 1GB RAM and that's |
| 6 |
>> with opening a bunch lot of pages; Fx4 generally takes around ~25-30%. |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>> While taking 30% of my RAM is fine when I'm not multitasking, the main |
| 9 |
>> problem is I am always multitasking. With Thunderbird taking another |
| 10 |
>> 15-20%, emerge ranging from 5-30%, and X about 5-10%, my computer is |
| 11 |
>> becoming unbearably slow when memory starved. |
| 12 |
>> |
| 13 |
>> I've been thinking about adding -Os (optimize-size) to my CFLAGS, does |
| 14 |
>> anyone knows if doing that will possibly bring down memory usage and |
| 15 |
>> speed up the computer? |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> No it will not. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> It's the size of the binary code image that is reduced, you may find that the |
| 20 |
> firefox *code* in memory is smaller too. But it will do nothing for the data |
| 21 |
> structures firefox creates to do it's job. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Makes sense, I just realized how stupid a thought it was... |
Archives