Topic: I should have stuck with Firefox 2

[Cobra951]

I recently noticed FF climbing quickly close to gigabyte VM usage.  By quickly I mean within a couple of days, while it would take FF 2 a couple of weeks to do the same.  This is still a memory leak issue, because even after identifying the tabs that cause a continuous increase in swap-file consumption (and shouldn't) and closing them, the usage does not drop at all.  My choices are not browsing where I want to browse and closing FF nightly.

I'm not alone.

[scottws]

Supposedly the problem is in the Javascript engine.  I wish someone would fix it.  It has been an issue since it was called "Firebird."

[Cobra951]

You mean they combined something else into FF that is now causing it to be much worse than 2 ever was?  Because that was never a problem with 2.  Memory use would not increase while idle, only while actively browsing from tab to tab, opening new ones, closing others, etc.  Even then, it would take weeks to get really bad.  Right now, 3 is up to 300 MB in just 1 day of very little activity.  I'll be closing it here shortly.

[beo]

could always give chrome a go. i've recently started using it as my primary browser and it's not actually made of evil and hate, contrary to popular belief.

[Cobra951]

Does it come with an ad blocker?  Bet it doesn't.

The more I think about this, the more it pisses me off.  I switched from 2 to 3 *only* because of the promised fix for memory leaks.  And the result is a much worse memory footprint than before, with no other unexpected benefits to offset it (because I have seen none at all).  Going back to 2 is not a simple matter, as I'm sure the installer isn't going to happily do all the migration of current settings and user data in the wrong direction.  It would probably require blowing away FF altogether, reg cleaning, finding the old FF2 installer, and starting from scratch.  Piss.

[scottws]

No. The Javascript engine has been the source of the Firebird/Firefox memory leak forever.  Or so I read awhile back.

[Xessive]

No. The Javascript engine has been the source of the Firebird/Firefox memory leak forever.  Or so I read awhile back.

Isn't this an inherent problem in almost all Java based applications?

[scottws]

Javascript ≠ Java.

The memory leak problem in Firefox is unique to it, as far as I know.  I don't think Opera, Safari, or IE use the same Javascript engine but I could be wrong on that.

[Xessive]

Javascript ≠ Java.

The memory leak problem in Firefox is unique to it, as far as I know.  I don't think Opera, Safari, or IE use the same Javascript engine but I could be wrong on that.

Thanks for the clarification.

I tried Opera a while back, it's pretty decent but not quite as customizable as Firefox. I'll take it over IE any day.

I'd guess the leak prevalent in the Javascript engine. I wonder what other browsers use the same one or experience similar problems.

[Cobra951]

I just closed it and reopened it again.  VM use went from close to 300 MB to 437 MB after sitting idle for a few hours.  VM use now (on the same reloaded session of 13 tabs plus their browsing history): 120 MB.

[idolminds]

I believe the javascript engine is getting totally scrapped and replaced in FF 3.1. There is a beta floating around with word of another coming soon.