748
firefox rule (slrpnk.net)
submitted 3 days ago by blibla@slrpnk.net to c/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] AbsoluteChicagoDog@lemm.ee 41 points 2 days ago

You can swear on the internet. Fuck, see?

[-] hakunawazo@lemmy.world 13 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I only see hunter2, oh wait, that's the wrong meme.

Edit: Y'all beat me to it.

You can, but i XXXXXXX can’t.

See.

[-] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago

That's because hunter2 is a forbidden word.

[-] yabai@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

Did you know Lemmy censors your password if you try and type it out? ********* See!

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] EffortlessEffluvium@lemm.ee 6 points 2 days ago

No we can’t because there’s a buncha fuckin’ “X”s in the fuckin’ way!

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] arc@lemm.ee 21 points 2 days ago

The weird thing to me whenever anyone complains how much memory a browser takes up, is what do they think the free RAM is doing otherwise? It's free so why can't an application use it? And that's what browsers do, taking the memory to use as a cache, and releasing it back to the system if available memory dips below some threshold.

[-] Psythik@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago

Also, modern OSes are designed to fill as much of your RAM as possible. Windows does it, Android does it; pretty sure Linux and MacOS does too. The number you're looking at only shows the RAM usage by currently running processes. Unused RAM is wasted RAM, so your OS will fill as much of it as possible with prefetched data so that your machine will be more responsive when you actually need to use the data that was stored in advance for you.

[-] IceFoxX@lemm.ee 2 points 1 day ago

Um, isn't only the addressable area reserved for the respective application? In other words, it doesn't even mean that the application fully utilizes the memory, but that the memory is continuously available for the application.

[-] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Each application has a full address space limited only by the number of address bits they use (which is way higher than the amount of physical RAM any machine uses, maybe even more than all RAM in existence for 64bit, since it can address space into the quintillions of bytes, or millions of terabytes).

It's only when they try to use a page of memory that the OS then reserves a physical page of memory that maps into your physical RAM. Allocating that space is a part of the page miss interrupt handler, which gets raised when a program in user space tries to access a memory address that isn't stored in the CPU's MMU.

When it gets that interrupt, the OS will check its own memory allocation table for that address (which stored in RAM and is larger than the CPU's hardware table) to see if it just needs to add the entry to the MMU, page it in from disk to a free page in RAM (possibly needing to page another page out to disk if there are no fee pages), or allocate a new entry to a free page (again maybe requiring a page out).

I believe Windows task manager (or Linux top) displays the total number of allocated pages * page size for how much memory a program is using. There might be a seperate column for how many pages are in physical RAM vs the page file.

Though there might be another path to get the OS to allocate pages before a page fault occurs, so it might not reflect the actual used memory. But allocating a new page on page miss isn't very expensive when there's free pages. Just a few table lookups and it goes back to the program. Paging out is more expensive, since each byte needs to be written to disk. Paging in is most expensive, since it usually involves a page out (because memory needs to fill up before a page out, so there's a good chance one needs to be freed) and then every byte of the desired page needs to be read from disk.

[-] PumpkinSkink@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

And their phones do this waaay more aggressively and noone complains.

[-] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 202 points 3 days ago

Bro has an anime profile pic and acts like he doesnt already have the tail plug in smh

[-] pennomi@lemmy.world 137 points 3 days ago

Not only that, but the character in that profile pic often sprouts cat ears when she has strong feelings.

[-] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 108 points 3 days ago

Hating furries is stage 1 of becoming a furry.

I haven't heard somebody use the word "murring" in like a decade. Methinks they're farther down the pipeline than they want to admit.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Draconic_NEO@pawb.social 39 points 3 days ago

Hating furries is already really cringe, but even more so when you have an anime profile picture. At that point it feels hypocritical.

[-] zyratoxx@lemm.ee 10 points 2 days ago

Since their profile picture is Komi Shouko from "Komi can't communicate", who is sometimes canonically portrayed with cat ears they are either joking or rejecting their true inner self.

[-] Draconic_NEO@pawb.social 3 points 2 days ago

Yeah, they're probably joking, though it wouldn't be the first time someone was acting like that while being unaware or in-denial.

[-] gmtom@lemmy.world 11 points 3 days ago

Me when I take a joke seriously.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] dditty@lemm.ee 107 points 3 days ago

I switched back to Firefox over a year ago and I have not noticed it using much less RAM than Chrome tbh. It's definitely the better browser for all the other reasons, but I wouldn't list memory utilization as a big advantage over other browsers

[-] cm0002@lemmy.world 82 points 3 days ago

The whole RAM thing is way overblown. Both browsers request a lot of RAM allocation, but only actually use a fraction of it. When the OS needs it for another process this "allocated, but unused" pool is the first to get used when "Free and unallocated" is gone

Problem is windows reports it all as the same in the task manager so people see that "70%" usage and freak out.

Tl:Dr Windows task manager is a fuckin lier.

[-] otacon239@lemmy.world 52 points 3 days ago

There’s also the idea that free RAM is somehow a good thing. In an ideal system, the RAM would always be “full” of potentially useful data. Having a bunch of empty RAM means that it’s not being useful. That space could be used to hold plenty of regularly used files that would be instantly loaded instead of having to pull from the drive again.

I don’t know when everyone started getting concerned with RAM usage, but in a perfect system, it would hold onto all of your frequently used programs and files that it could fit from boot and then those would load instantly.

Some Linux distros even allow loading the entire OS into RAM for wild speeds.

Idle RAM is just that. It does you no favors. Now, I do understand that you don’t want to be completely out, but we act like having 80% free is a goal for some reason.

[-] Badabinski@kbin.earth 24 points 3 days ago

The problem is that the extra RAM used by a browser is held on an exclusive basis and so is not nicely reclaimable by the kernel. I love that Linux caches the shit out of files in RAM, it's great. It's also great that it can release that memory when I launch a chundering dumpster fire application that eats all of my RAM. If a browser had been holding that memory, then the godawful Linux OOM killer would have launched, halted all threads on the system, walked the entire process tree, and SIGKILLed something (probably not a browser tab) before letting everyone else resume.

With the way memory is currently managed, a bloated browser is a liability. Cached state needs to be stored in something like a mmaped file so that the kernel can flush pages out of memory if someone else comes along with a malloc. Alternatively, there needs to be communication between a browser and a userspace OOM daemon. If the system started hitting a soft limit, then the browser could start unloading background shit more aggressively.

Free memory is wasted memory, but so is memory that can't be used for anything else when it's needed.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Draconic_NEO@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Most browsers these days have issues with high RAM usage, and memory leaks to. I'd recommend trying to limit the RAM of the browser, it stops it from eating up so much.

Here's how I did it on linux. I'm sure there's a way to do it if you're on Windows though (might not be as good though).

Desktop file to limit Firefox to 8GB of RAM

[Desktop Entry]
Version=1.0
Name=Firefox RAM limit 8GB
GenericName=Firefox Ram limit 8GB
Comment=Limit RAM for Firefox to 8GB;
Exec=systemd-run --user --scope -p MemoryLimit=8G firefox
Icon=firefox
Type=Application
Terminal=false
Categories=Utility;Development;
StartupWMClass=Firefox

This is a script to limit Firefox to 8 gigabytes of RAM, you may change it lower or higher depending on what your needs are by changing the number from 8 to whatever else you'd like. Fair warning though setting it too low will cause Firefox to lag very badly, and will crash chromium browsers outright (Ask me how I found out).

[-] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 72 points 3 days ago

JUST BECAUSE I USE FIREFOX DOESN'T MEAN I'M A FURRY!

I mean, I am a furry.

BUT NOT BECAUSE I USE FIREFOX!

[-] modest_bunny@lemm.ee 46 points 3 days ago
[-] user224@lemmy.sdf.org 29 points 3 days ago

Source: https://xenia.chimmie.k.vu/ (She has more art, I recommend checking it)

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 20 points 3 days ago

I work in tech, and I don't understand people's obsession with having all their RAM free at all times.

If you don't use it, why do you have it?

Windows (not the best OS, but the one I know the most about), will lie to you about how much memory you have that's free. It puts data in RAM as cache. In the event you need that data, it's already loaded in RAM. Usually this is stuff like DLLs and executables for programs.

There's a difference between "free" memory, and "available" memory.

In addition, RAM is always going down in price, so 32G today costs what 16G did, some number of years ago. The same can be said for 16G vs 8G, etc. Though, the comparison becomes less relevant as you get into much smaller and older memory types, since the cost per dimm will only ever go so low.

Buy the memory, use as much of it as you can, as often as you can. Go wild with it. Enjoy.

[-] Draconic_NEO@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 2 days ago

There’s a difference between “free” memory, and “available” memory.

I agree with this, and I'm sure most people complaining about Firefox or Chrome's abhorrent memory usage would too. The problem with most browsers is that they eat up the available memory and often do not give it back. So you end up with situations where you're running low on available RAM even though you have 32GB installed.

Buy the memory, use as much of it as you can, as often as you can. Go wild with it. Enjoy.

Sure, if you release it when not using it, otherwise unlimited RAM privilege revoked. Memory leaks suck and when they chew up all your RAM and they continue to happen, offending apps should either be no longer used, or limited to their minimum necessary RAM requirements to limit the damage they'll do.

Hence why I capped Firefox at 8GB, anything more would be wasted when it inevitably leaks.

Desktop file to limit Firefox to 8GB of RAM

[Desktop Entry]
Version=1.0
Name=Firefox RAM limit 8GB
GenericName=Firefox Ram limit 8GB
Comment=Limit RAM for Firefox to 8GB;
Exec=systemd-run --user --scope -p MemoryLimit=8G firefox
Icon=firefox
Type=Application
Terminal=false
Categories=Utility;Development;
StartupWMClass=Firefox

[-] daddy32@lemmy.world 13 points 2 days ago

None of thaťs helpful. You know, when browser uses half your ram, teams quarter and rest of the programs the rest, windows is swapping on your SSD like a prick and you cannot switch windows - none of what you said helps. And of course, the RAM is soldered on and cannot be expanded.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Johanno@feddit.org 16 points 3 days ago

Use all the RAM you want, but if another program needs it give it back ffs!

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] HelloHotel@lemmy.world 11 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

For me there are programs that "can acceptably use that much RAM" and those that it's "unacceptable", to me. what's 20% to 40% of my gaming rig's resources may be uncomfortably taxing and laggy for my laptop. Its okay to waste resources on my gaming rig but the laptop needs all it can get. I accept some software will not reasonably run on the laptop. My employer has stuck me on 10yo hardware before, running windows 10 pro + intrusive expensive antivirus and nobody is around to question why their computers are getting 5-15fps and locking up for a minute or two when you open chrome. It becomes normal. Any software is the host and/or backbone for other running software should focus on reducing it's own resource usage for the sake of its children.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] als@lemmy.blahaj.zone 51 points 3 days ago

tailplug is fine but I draw the line at "fuckin"

[-] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 21 points 3 days ago

Yeah procreation is sin. Masturbation is not.

[-] Tiefkuehlkost@feddit.org 17 points 3 days ago

Why the fuck is fuckin censored hut stuff like tailplugs not xD, what a fuckin bull shit.

[-] Infomatics90@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 days ago

fuck the fucking fuckers.

[-] franklin@lemmy.world 30 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Listen using Firefox doesn't make me a furry.

I mean I am but that's not why.

Pfft, everyone knows the cool kids use Lynx.

[-] CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world 10 points 3 days ago

6 gig of ram on a browser!? wtf people close your old tabs.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 26 Nov 2024
748 points (97.5% liked)

196

16597 readers
2817 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS