Darxus

Google Chrome sucks at freeing ram

Google Chrome sucks at freeing ram

[info]darxus
7/11/10 11:52 am
Previous Entry Add to Memories Share this! Next Entry
2009-09-29
This computer with 8gb ram keeps ending up swapping because of chrome.
I had 48 tabs open, with chrome using 4.2 gigs of ram, copied all the open urls to a file, closed chrome, started it, re-opened all the links, and memory is at 0.8 gigs of ram, in use. 19.0% of what it had been using.
Previous Entry Add to Memories Share this! Next Entry

  • [info]woodwardiocom
    7/11/10 04:15 pm (UTC)
    If the JavaScript (or whatever) on a page is badly coded, so it keeps consuming more and more memory, any browser has the option of breaking the page, or living with the problem. It's not necessarily Chrome's fault.

    Edited at 2010-07-11 04:15 pm (UTC)

    • [info]milktree
      7/11/10 04:46 pm (UTC)

      Ugh.. this is why I like web pages that could be written in vi. JavaScript and Flash and all similar crap never fails to annoy me. That's not really true, but the vast overwhelming majority of it just makes the pages harder to read and navigate.

      • [info]darxus
        7/11/10 06:39 pm (UTC)
        There is JavaScript on my site that's written in vi :)
        But it's some very basic image pre-caching in my gallery that is tested to function perfectly in the absence of JavaScript support.

        • [info]milktree
          7/11/10 06:48 pm (UTC)
          You, my friend, are an exception.

          Most Flash and JavaScript is crap, and only makes things worse. (although shinier)

          And, the fact you wrote it in vi makes it by my definition, OK.

    • [info]darxus
      7/11/10 07:50 pm (UTC)
      Poor behavior by the browser is always the browser's fault. Negligent or malicious web pages do not make it acceptable for a browser to suck.

      Just like allowing a bad program to crash a computer is always the operating systems fault. (Or maybe the hardware.)

      • [info]feng_huang
        7/11/10 09:07 pm (UTC)
        I think I'm too used to Reddit, because I looked for the arrow to upvote this comment after I read it.

      • [info]woodwardiocom
        7/11/10 09:10 pm (UTC)
        That's a valid way of looking at it.

        Ideally, I guess, Chrome would report which sites leak memory, and then advise you not to visit them anymore, or offer to break them when they exceed X megabytes.

        • [info]darxus
          7/11/10 10:57 pm (UTC)
          Chrome has its own task manager, which you can get to by right clicking the title bar, or hitting shift-escape. Some of the tabs are somehow linked, I don't understand what's going on there.

          • [info]underwatercolor
            7/13/10 06:29 am (UTC)
            When you "open in a new tab," Chrome tends to use one process for multiple tabs. I can think of some reasons why, but it's probably lame.

            • [info]darxus
              7/13/10 01:31 pm (UTC)
              Yeah. Probably sharing cache memory or something. But given their memory problems, it seems to currently be a terrible idea.

  • That's unfortunate

    [info]drwex
    7/12/10 04:09 pm (UTC)
    I've been on the verge of chucking Firefox because they seem incapable of solving their memory issues. Then they rearchitected (around release 3.4 I think) to move all media processing into a separate process. The result is a still leaky as heck, but much less likely to freeze up my computer.

    • Re: That's unfortunate

      [info]darxus
      7/12/10 04:17 pm (UTC)
      Yeah it's fascinating how browsers have always seemed to have so much difficulty not sucking. I assume it doesn't help that most of the html on the internet conforms to no standard.

      You could try Opera.

  • [info]underwatercolor
    7/13/10 06:27 am (UTC)
    Yeah. Chrome has several problems when left open for long periods of time. I... still use it, as Firefox annoyed me more. But come on... this isn't what this era considers a hard problem. :)
Powered by LiveJournal.com