On Tue, May 5, 2015, at 02:53 AM, Leman Bennett (Omega X) wrote: > On 5/5/2015 12:23 AM, Robert O'Callahan wrote: > > On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 10:29 AM, Leman Bennett (Omega X) < > > Redacted.For.Spam@request.contact> wrote: > > > >> Inquiring minds would like to know. > >> > >> At the moment, e10s tabs is still somewhat slower than non-e10s. Multiple > >> content processes would go a long way for more responsive navigation and > >> less stalls on the one content process. That stall spinner is getting a LOT > >> of hate at the moment. > >> > > > > I don't know, but I've enabled multiple content processes, and I haven't > > noticed any problems --- and the spinner does seem to be shown a lot less. > > > > Rob > > > > The issue I've seen with dom.ipc.processCount beyond one process is that > they're not dynamic. Those instances will stay open for the entire > session and not unload themselves after a time which can mean double the > memory use. > > I heard that there was rumor of a plan to limit process count spawn to > per-domain. But I've not seen offhand of a bug filed for it or anything > else that relates to achieving more than one content process instance.
There's a bug filed[1], but every time I've asked about it I've been told it's not currently on the roadmap. I, too, find that single-process e10s is worse for responsiveness, which is unfortunate. Last time I tried to use dom.ipc.processCount > 1 I found that window.open was broken (and also target=_blank on links) which made actual browsing difficult, but I haven't tested it recently. I also filed a couple of bugs[2][3] about being smarter about multiple content processes which would make things a bit nicer. -Ted 1. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=641683 2. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1066789 3. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1066792 _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
