prehistoric-systems/uBlock
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock.git synced 2026-03-11 09:04:36 +00:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

Grammar Corrections/Rewordings, URL Updates, Cleanup extra space

q1800 2022-04-02 16:29:13 -05:00
parent 0b8a951c40
commit 35f49ad3ab
1 changed files with 9 additions and 9 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

18
Memory-footprint:-what-happens-inside-uBlock-after-installation.md

@ -14,28 +14,28 @@
- Any change in the selection of filter lists, or change in the content of selected filter lists will invalidate uBO's selfie
1. Even after the growth in memory baseline, uBO's _own memory_ footprint is still quite a bit smaller than that of Adblock Plus (ABP) -- once the garbage collector does its job
1. uBO's much smaller _contributed memory_ footprint to web pages is much smaller than that of ABP
- The contributed footprint to web pages is part of the memory footprint of the web pages themselves
- The contributed footprint to web pages is part of the memory footprint of the web pages themselves
- As opposed to an extension's own memory footprint, visible using Chromium's _"Task Manager"_, the contributed memory footprint to web pages cannot be easily seen by users
- Though this measure is not readily visible, it's where you get the biggest bang for the buck with uBO relative to ABP -- because uBO **does not** inject thousands of CSS rules into pages and embedded frames (unlike ABP)
Once you have reached the point where there is a valid uBO selfie, uBO will run the most efficiently.
The next time you launch uBO and there is a valid selfie, the load time will be a fraction of the load time when no selfie is available <sup>[1]</sup>, and uBO's baseline memory footprint will be smaller than when uBO launches without a selfie available.
The next time you launch uBO with a valid selfie, the load time will be a fraction of that when no selfie is available <sup>[1]</sup>. uBO's baseline memory footprint will be smaller than when uBO launches with no selfie.
So my point is that uBO will perform at best efficiency if you give it time to optimize itself after installation: In subsequent launches, uBO will perform more efficiently than what you may have observed immediately after you installed it.
So my point is that uBO will perform at its best efficiency if you give it time to optimize itself after installation: In subsequent launches, uBO will perform more efficiently than what you may have observed immediately after installation.
<sub>[1] See <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpypOeK10N8></sub>
***
Also, if you want to look at memory figures, in addition to the above notes regarding garbage collection, keep in mind:
- The [Chromium bug](https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=441500) which causes systematically a memory leak when opening an extension popup UI.
- Currently opened extension option page(s) contribute to increase the extension's memory use
- Sometimes a browser's garbage collector ("GC") is lazier than others, i.e. it may takes longer to kick in.
- In my benchmarks, it has happened I had to force a GC cycle using dev tools.
- The [Chromium bug](https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=441500) causes systematic memory leaks when opening an extension popup UI.
- Currently opened extension options page(s) contribute to increasing the extension's memory use
- Sometimes, a browser's garbage collector ("GC") is lazier than others; therefore, it may take longer to kick in.
- In my benchmarks, it has happened that I had to force a GC cycle using dev tools.
***
- Notes: the above is especially true for Chromium-based browser. However with the [early preview of the Firefox version](https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/issues/27#issuecomment-67308172), the memory churning referred to above seems to result in much smaller memory peak usage.
- Notes: The above is especially true for a Chromium-based browser. However, with the [early preview of the Firefox version](https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/issues/27#issuecomment-67308172), the memory churning referred to above seems to result in much smaller memory peak usage.
- Related: ["Notes on memory benchmarks, selfies"](./Notes-on-memory-benchmarks,-selfies)
- Beware: ["Popup UI of extensions causes systematic memory leaks"](https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=441500)
- Beware: ["Popup UI of extensions causes systematic memory leaks"](https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=441500)