I think we should be shooting for a target clamp value of 3-5ms. dave
On Oct 1, 2008, at 12:02 PM, Linus Upson wrote: > We can use the histogram facility in chrome to collect data from a dev > channel release. It should only take a few weeks to get good data. > What exactly do we want to measure to settle on a value? > > Linus > > > On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 2:34 AM, Maciej Stachowiak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> >> On Oct 1, 2008, at 1:24 AM, David Hyatt wrote: >> >> On Oct 1, 2008, at 2:52 AM, Darin Fisher wrote: >> >> >> I can appreciate that you aren't interested in revisiting this >> problem after >> having resolved it finally by adding the clamp. I believe you when >> you say >> you had compelling evidence too. >> >> >> We are interested in revisiting the problem or we wouldn't be >> suggesting a >> new high resolution timer API. >> >> I'm with Hyatt. The reason we are having this thread is precisely >> to revisit >> the problem. >> >> I don't know how clear I was in the previous email, but basically >> it can >> take a lot of time before you see problems. What happens is a site >> makes a >> change, screws up and puts in an unintentional setTimeout loop, and >> then >> they pwn the CPU of a browser with no clamp. They don't discover >> it because >> every browser has a pretty high clamp. When we had these issues, >> they'd >> basically crop up one site at a time every so often. The good news >> is that >> usually the sites would fix the problems, but the bad news is it >> could take >> a while, and angry users would be switching to Firefox. >> >> That is what I was alluding to when I said it took us 3.5 years to >> first >> realize we had to add the clamp. The problems come and go, but they >> are >> consistently a problem, and it can take a while to realize it. >> However, the bug Mike cited seems to mention problems with the 1ms >> limit on >> some real sites: >> <http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=792>. At least >> 5 sites >> are mentioned, including nytimes. >> I think we are converging on some good solutions (somewhat lower >> basic >> clamp, new highres API) and I regret if this thread has felt >> hostile to >> anyone. >> Regards, >> Maciej >> >> _______________________________________________ >> webkit-dev mailing list >> webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org >> http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev >> >> _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
