Firefox 2.0 is a heavy leaker...

Discussion in 'other software & services' started by Cerxes, Nov 4, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Cerxes

    Cerxes Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2005
    Posts:
    581
    Location:
    Northern Europe
    Hi! I´ve noticed for a while that Firefox 2.0 and/or an extension is leaking badly as shown:

    Firefox.jpg
    Well, something is wrong here...

    The question is: is it firefox 2.0 or some extension that is causing this? At this occasion I had at most five tabs opened and I have the following extensions:

    Adblock Filterset.G 0.3.0.4
    Adblock Plus 0.7.2.2
    DOM Inspector 1.8.1
    McAfee SiteAdvisor 24.0
    NoScript 1.1.4.5.061030
    PDF Download 0.7.6
    QuickJava 0.4.2.1
    RefControl 0.8.8
    Stealther 0.98

    If someone knows the answer...

    Regards, C.
     
  2. the Tester

    the Tester Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2002
    Posts:
    2,854
    Location:
    The Gateway to the Blue Hills,WI.
    I don't have Firefox 2.0 yet.
    The FF browsers do seem to leak memory anyway.
     
  3. WSFuser

    WSFuser Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Posts:
    10,632
    it could be adblock plus, but then again Firefox and high memory usage are two peas in a pod.
     
  4. aigle

    aigle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Posts:
    11,047
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia/ Pakistan
    6 Tabs open.
     

    Attached Files:

    • f.JPG
      f.JPG
      File size:
      75 KB
      Views:
      247
  5. aigle

    aigle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Posts:
    11,047
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia/ Pakistan
    BTW u don,t need PDF download, u can get almost same functionality from browser settings.
     
  6. PaulBB

    PaulBB Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Posts:
    708
    Get rid of those and you'll see the memory leak is gone.
     
  7. Robyn

    Robyn Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2004
    Posts:
    1,189
    I haven't been checking for memory usage with Firefox but noticed this post regarding NoScript. I only have Mr Tech Local Install + No Script running - is it wise to remove No Script completely?
     
  8. aigle

    aigle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Posts:
    11,047
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia/ Pakistan
    Not wise ofcourse unless u have problem.
     
  9. Antarctica

    Antarctica Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Posts:
    1,617
    Location:
    Canada
    The workaround I have found to this memory problem, is to clear "Private data" manually from time to time. It releases memory instantly.
     
  10. HAN

    HAN Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Posts:
    2,080
    Location:
    USA
    Robyn: Unless you are having your own set of memory leak difficulties, I would not recommend dumping any extension. Least of all NoScript. NoScript makes Firefox much safer. I run NoScript on 3 different PCs and I have never had any memory issues. For that matter, I never have memory leak problems of any kind. But I don't run programs in the background that I'm not using and I shut down/reboot daily...

    **And as Antarctica notes, I clean out my FF data fairly often. (Except some bulletin board cookies. Like Wilders... ;) )
     
  11. Robyn

    Robyn Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2004
    Posts:
    1,189
    Thank you I will keep NoScript enabled as I do feel safer being able to control this way.
    I like to keep things clean and tidy and like others just keep cookies I need for forums :)

    I was using IE7 in Vista but it does not compare to Firefox for me. I much prefer FF even though it took me a long time to even try the browser. The only install which is slower for me is the one on my laptop I think slow start up noticed there but with my main computers FF is fine.
    Firefox makes running without scripts a lot easier than IE ever did or does.
     
  12. JohnnyBravo

    JohnnyBravo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2006
    Posts:
    82
    If you're using NoScript you don't need that QuickJava
     
  13. Cerxes

    Cerxes Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2005
    Posts:
    581
    Location:
    Northern Europe
    That´s correct, but I like to see if the possibility of running Java applets is closed or not.

    When it comes to the other extensions, I´ve deleted Adblock Plus and Filterset G. NoScript is to valueble to get rid off. By running with five tabs open for about two hours, it looks like this:

    Firefox 2.jpg

    The memory usage is half of before, better than nothing I suppose. But maybe it´s to difficult to get rid of/correct the code that leads to the amount of leaking considering the syntax they are using (no garbage cleaning...), and the composition of the design/coding organisation regarding the project.

    Regards, C.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.