On Tue, 2008-04-29 at 15:15 +0800, Alfred Peng wrote:
> Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> > The other issue is of course that almost every major software release 
> > is slower than the one that came before.  The number of necessary 
> > shared libraries tends to multiply like Gerbils since everyone wants 
> > their small contribution (requiring another huge library) to be 
> > included.  Some might call this the "Microsoft domino effect".
> >   
> This seems to be a common case for the software development, with more 
> and more fancy features and colorful stuff are introduced :-)
> 
> I searched around and found some interesting things for Firefox. From 
> the following two Tinderbox page, Firefox 3.0 performance has been 
> improved to compare with Firefox 2.0:
> http://tinderbox.mozilla.org/showbuilds.cgi?tree=Firefox
> http://tinderbox.mozilla.org/showbuilds.cgi?tree=Mozilla1.8
> 
> Please note the two trees named "Linux talos trunk fast 
> qm-plinux-fast01" and "Linux talos branch fast qm-plinux-fast02". They 
> run on two mac minis with same hardware configuration, deploy the 
> talos[1] test framework with automation testing[2] for Javascript, DHTML 
> performance, Startup time, Page load time...
> 
> I also tried the sunspider benchmark: 
> http://webkit.org/perf/sunspider-0.9/sunspider.html on my x86 box 
> here(Nevada b87 with Firefox 3.0b5 and 2.0.0.12) and saw some 
> improvement for Firefox 3.0.
> 
> BTW, some performance/memory footprint progress for Firefox 3.0 on 
> Solaris(Thanks for Ginn's hard work):
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=425626
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=422055
> 
> Cheers,
> -Alfred
> 
> [1] http://quality.mozilla.org/projects/automation/talos
> [2] http://wiki.mozilla.org/Performance:Tinderbox_Tests

Hi,

Thank you guys for the feedback - it appears that the single vector for
all missery is flash, news.zdnet.com seems to use flash in every add,
which which extrapolated over a whole webpage, makes the experience
non-too-savoury to say the least.

Btw, I'm wondering, do we choose what scheduler is used, because it
appears that it isn't as smooth over all as it should be.

Matthew


Reply via email to