digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Reducing Your Firefox Memory Usage -- Which Extensions Hog Your Memory

tech.cybernetnews.com — A good guide on which extensions you need to watch out for in Firefox. You won't believe how popular some of the extensions are that have memory leaks!

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • Strangers, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7A lot of the best ones are there unfortunately.

    Digg
    • ThePhilomath, on 10/12/2007, -4/+68Reducing Your Memory Usage In Firefox

      There has been a lot of talk about how to optimize Firefox to run the most efficiently. CNet%u2019s most recent article goes through some helpful tips but doesn%u2019t jump into many details. Here I am going to explain which extensions have memory leaks or will slow down Firefox%u2019s performance.

      First, before I dive into the main topic there are a few things that you should change in your Firefox settings if you really want to optimize this. Just follow this tutorial that I put together.

      Okay, now let%u2019s talk about the extensions. This is the point that you may want to turn your head because I am about to bring some truth to some of the most popular extensions.

      1. IE Tab 1.0.7! Yes, it is true that one of the most convenient extensions has a memory leak. I can%u2019t say that I am super shocked by this because how efficient can it be to run Internet Explorer in Firefox?
      2. Session Saver 0.2.1.031 has a known memory leak.
      3. ForecastFox 0.8.5 also has a memory leak%u2026and that very disappointing since most Firefox users have this sitting in their toolbar (so what is the weather like by you :) ).
      4. Filterset.G Updater AND FlashGot used in conjunction will produce a memory leak.
      5. FasterFox doesn%u2019t have a memory leak specifically, but it will not help your Firefox performance. It does help your browsing performance but if you decide to keep this extension at least make sure you don%u2019t have prefetching enabled.
      6. Tabbrowser Extensions doesn%u2019t have memory leaks either but will definitely slow Firefox down and it has many conflicts with other extension. It can even stop Firefox from being able to startup! A better alternative is Tab Mix or Tab Mix Plus which offer the same set of features. If you don%u2019t need all the features of Tab Mix Plus then just use Tab Mix to lower the memory usage a little.
      7. Please check for updates to ensure you are using the most recent version of the following extensions: Adblock 0.5.3.042, AdBlock Plus 0.6.1.1, NoScript 1.1.3.9, Search Keys 0.7.3, Thumbs 0.6.2 %u2014 each of these extensions HAD known memory leaks but they have now been fixed.

      That is about it for the most popular Firefox extensions that have been tested. Another important thing to do is upgrade to Firefox 1.5.0.1 if you haven%u2019t already. This build has fixed two memory leaks that were very common: leak when selecting and leak from global scope polluter. The latest trunk also has a long list of memory leak fixes so keep your eyes peeled for a new release of Firefox.


      That should eleviate the digg effect.
    • bmobile, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Agreed...a lot of the best ones are there but I was able to find out some that I had no idea were even out there. For example, ForecastFox is friggin awesome!
    • alphamerik, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Thanks for posting the text!

      Why do these extensions even cause memory leaks? To make these extensions cross-platform they have to be written in Javascript. Javascript has basically no memory management. Are these developers dumb and creating ever-expanding arrays or is there some more basic issue with Javascript in Firefox?
    • mvprj84, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3My host and I have gotten the site back up.
    • richwklein, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0With Mozilla's XPCOM classes your extension can cross programming language boundaries. Javascript can call C++ which can call Python etc.. A lot of leaks are caused by circular references between objects that cross language boundaries so they are never released. Here is a good explanation http://www.mozilla.org/scriptable/avoiding-leaks.html. I also think bug #206520 is another reason alot of extensions leak.
  • aliendave, on 10/12/2007, -14/+6Memory leak = sky is falling
  • matt95z, on 10/12/2007, -12/+0Gone.

    I need it though. +Digg
  • techferret, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Some of us never think about the extensions as one of the problems related to Firefox's obvious Memory Leak. Its nice to know which extensions are causing leaks. I'll think twice about the extensions that I have on my computer (except for the Adblock-Filterset.G Updater>__
  • eklitzke, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14Coral cached link: http://tech.cybernetnews.com.nyud.net:8080/2006/04/04/reducing-your-memory-usage-in-firefox/
    • tarzan99, on 10/12/2007, -6/+2Thanks it's already DiggDoSed
    • mvprj84, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4After talking to my host they informed me that there was an attack on my site...they are actively trying to fix it.
  • osuchasenuts, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Sigh...

    Can someone just post a page of text that has what extensions the website lists
  • ArisBoch, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6I use everyone of those listed. Plus a few more. I think I once saw Firefox using 330 MB of RAM on my machine. So I think the solution is obvious: I'm going to have to buy more RAM :) If anyone needs me, I'll be browsing Newegg.
  • Flux0r, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4Related Story:
    http://www.digg.com/software/10_Ways_To_Optimize_Firefox
  • jsavimbi, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3How about optimizing your webpage for Digg?
  • Leech, on 10/12/2007, -6/+4damn digg effect...
  • VeganG, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4At least they mention that Adblock is fixed.
  • jaguar, on 10/12/2007, -19/+8Here is copy and paste from the coral cache:

    There has been a lot of talk about how to optimize Firefox to run the most efficiently. CNet’s most recent article goes through some helpful tips but doesn’t jump into many details. Here I am going to explain which extensions have memory leaks or will slow down Firefox’s performance.

    First, before I dive into the main topic there are a few things that you should change in your Firefox settings if you really want to optimize this. Just follow this tutorial that I put together.

    Okay, now let’s talk about the extensions. This is the point that you may want to turn your head because I am about to bring some truth to some of the most popular extensions.

    IE Tab 1.0.7! Yes, it is true that one of the most convenient extensions has a memory leak. I can’t say that I am super shocked by this because how efficient can it be to run Internet Explorer in Firefox?
    Session Saver 0.2.1.031 has a known memory leak.
    ForecastFox 0.8.5 also has a memory leak…and that very disappointing since most Firefox users have this sitting in their toolbar (so what is the weather like by you ).
    Filterset.G Updater AND FlashGot used in conjunction will produce a memory leak.
    FasterFox doesn’t have a memory leak specifically, but it will not help your Firefox performance. It does help your browsing performance but if you decide to keep this extension at least make sure you don’t have prefetching enabled.
    Tabbrowser Extensions doesn’t have memory leaks either but will definitely slow Firefox down and it has many conflicts with other extension. It can even stop Firefox from being able to startup! A better alternative is Tab Mix or Tab Mix Plus which offer the same set of features. If you don’t need all the features of Tab Mix Plus then just use Tab Mix to lower the memory usage a little.
    Please check for updates to ensure you are using the most recent version of the following extensions: Adblock 0.5.3.042, AdBlock Plus 0.6.1.1, NoScript 1.1.3.9, Search Keys 0.7.3, Thumbs 0.6.2 — each of these extensions HAD known memory leaks but they have now been fixed.
    That is about it for the most popular Firefox extensions that have been tested. Another important thing to do is upgrade to Firefox 1.5.0.1 if you haven’t already. This build has fixed two memory leaks that were very common: leak when selecting and leak from global scope polluter. The latest trunk also has a long list of memory leak fixes so keep your eyes peeled for a new release of Firefox.

    • jaguar, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10a cleaned up and abridged version:

      1. IE Tab 1.0.7
      2. Session Saver 0.2.1.031
      3. ForecastFox 0.8.5
      4. Filterset.G Updater AND FlashGot used in conjunction
      5. FasterFox (if you have prefetching enabled)
      6. Tabbrowser Extensions
      7. non-updated Adblock 0.5.3.042, AdBlock Plus 0.6.1.1, NoScript 1.1.3.9, Search Keys 0.7.3, Thumbs 0.6.2

      Edit: Why is the previous comment being modded down? I just posted the text for those that can't get to the page! I'm sorry that the comment system wouldn't let me edit it.
    • Xoligy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3It's being modded down because it's not needed. They aren't modding it down because they have a personal vengeance against you.
  • neuros, on 10/12/2007, -8/+3Reducing Your Downtime Occurance -- Which Server Can Handle Digg?
    Well... not his apparently.
  • rollercoaster37, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I'm running FF2a1 - It's using less than half of the RAM 1.5 would consume (Although, that was never a major problem for me - I've got plenty of RAM.)
  • davidmonaghan, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1"500 Internal Server Error"

    Sounds interesting though, will check out mirrors and copies... Thanks.
  • tribalsun, on 10/12/2007, -11/+7Use Opera, carry on.
    • ZachPruckowski, on 10/12/2007, -6/+8I'll use Opera when it gets an easy-to-use adblocker. the ones it has now for OS X are too complicated.
    • Densetsu, on 10/12/2007, -10/+4> Use Opera, carry on.


      *clap* *clap* *clap*
    • dan00b, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4i was looking for that :-D
  • Chaos12, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2i only use 2 so thats good.
  • richwklein, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9We know Forecastfox 0.8.5 has some memory leaks. We are planning on doing a full leak analysis for 1.0. In the mean time, I've been actively working on resolving some of the leaks, and I think I've made some good progress for our 0.9 release.
    • dashifen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Thanks for your hard work!
    • haxx4, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I look forward to the improved versions. Thanks!
  • feanor512, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4When I tried it, the Google Safe Browsing extension took up ~35MB of RAM and crashed Firefox a lot.
    • 511pf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Google Safe Browsing didn't crash Firefox for me, but it did use a bunch of RAM and noticeably slowed down Firefox.
    • terminalpariah, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I've got Safe Browsing but I haven't noticed any significant increase in RAM usage. I have a tonne of extensions and I cap out at about 30MB.
  • ViperDaimao, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2One of my extensions or some combonation of settings and extensions absolutely hates going to espn.com Often I'll go there, and firefox will simple close down with no warning or error message.
  • loqqq, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2An almost identical list is available at http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?t=354828#2051115
  • zizzybaloobah, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Since I've upgraded Adblock plus and Filterset G. Updater, I've noticed a signifcant improvement in performance and reduction in memory usage. I am also using Tab Mix Plus, IE View, Web Developer, and del.icio.us extensions among others.
  • mistshadow2k4, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I just uninstalled forecastfox, restarted firefox and now it's only using 30 megs of memory. That's roughly the same amount of memory that Opera uses. When they get that fixed in forecastfox I'll use it again, but until then I can live without it.
  • jfox00, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I really think everyone is "digging" this article, becuase they really WANT a way to decrease the memory footprint. Hey Firefox developer guys, you hear us!? I tried uninstalling a few of these, I've tweaked every memory setting in my about:config, and my firefox still climbs right up to 200,000K of memory after about 8 hours of use. I know, I should just close firefox and reopen it. And i do. But I dont have to do this with Outlook, or IE, or Trillian, or my own applications. Something is still not right. And its hard to recommend an amazing browser like firefox when I can't trust the way it manages the memory.
  • SmartAlx, on 10/12/2007, -10/+4Hahahaha!

    “Firefox Rules” they say.

    We say, “No, Opera has more features.”

    “You can get all of those features with extensions,” they say.

    But those extensions slow Firefox down.
    Hahahahahahahahahahahaha.
    I really don’t understand the popularity of Firefox when it’s so obvious that Opera is a superior product.
    • MyNameIsLee, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5quit being a fanboy....we don't care which product you think is better.
    • SmartAlx, on 10/12/2007, -8/+3It's not wether *I* THINK it is better. It IS better. It's not an opinion. It's a fact. To give firefox Opera's features, you must include extensions which slow it down. Don't include the extensions and Firefox still has memory leaks. Plus Firefox without the exensions has a larger footprint than Opera WITH the features. No matter how you slice it, Opera is better.
    • jczer68, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Opera is okay. I use it once in awhile for something different, but it doesn't come remotely close to the tools & features I have set up on Firefox.
    • SmartAlx, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1What are some of those tools & features?
    • MyNameIsLee, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2"It IS better. It's not an opinion. It's a fact."

      I don't know where you get your "facts" but you have negative diggs and that's a fact.
    • Metal_Guru, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I was (still am) impartial to the popularity of the browser when choosing, but I found Firefox easier to use nevertheless. I've given others a choice between Firefox and Opera when switching from IE, and they chose Firefox in the end after running both. Opera just has too many buttons laying around that are no always needed and hard to get rid of easily. Overall, it's harder for even an experienced user like me to customize it, let alone noobs.
      Sure, there are many that will find it a piece of cake, but I've found that there are many more that don't.
    • asym, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@metal guru: Almost all of the GUI customization in Opera is drag-and-drop, similiar to Firefox, except categorized and more powerful. The customization combined with the trashcan feature was enough to get me to switch within about 10 minutes of using the product.
    • SmartAlx, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2“I don't know where you get your "facts" but you have negative diggs and that's a fact.”

      Because my comments are in a community heavily populated by Firefox Fans. Diggs do not equal facts. They are opinions. But memory footprint, speed, and features are facts. Opera is ahead of the game in both. And besides, I can’t help but to notice that you also have negative diggs.
  • Burmask, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1But it's still CSS 2.0 compliant.......these extensions are the Achilles heel of firefix. Maybe if they charged for it and developed a profit model then good developers could get paid to fix the problems. Until then, it's just still CSS 2.0 compliant.
  • HvitRavn, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2Firefox requires extensions to be a memory hog? I didn't know. I thought it already did the job quite well itself.
  • SmeRndmGy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1ha they tell you to disable fasterfox prefetching, the very thing which makes it faster. They claim it does not make browsing any faster. I know fore sure that it DOES make it faster. Maybe they are saying that because they don't like how it causes extra bandwidth use costs on their servers. At very least they shouldnt lie about it though.
    • mvprj84, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I didn't say that prefetching makes browsing slower, I said that you should disable it because it slows down Firefox. Read Mozilla's articles, they say to disable it too.
  • truebullfan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2i have most of those on the list and i usually cap around 70 mb.
  • Pentarix, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2haha firefox crashed while viewing that page... what a p.o.s.
  • maggoty, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3the memory problem used to be a big hassle for me, but since 1.5 has come along and also since I've settled on a number of extensions that all seem to work with each other and not crap out, everything has been fine.
    Flashblock caused me so much heart ache when I think about it. I don't use it anymore, but since then, firefox takes about 85megs on average, and is finally stable.
  • vertigoblue, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2run a gig of memory and your fine...
  • Peacemaker, on 10/12/2007, -1/+01. Don't leave your browser open all day long, especially if your running windows!
    2. Memory is cheap, get more memory!
  • Martin9sek, on 10/12/2007, -5/+0[URL=http://martin9sek.pijusmagnificus.com/2006/04/05/optimizando/firefox]Martin's Blog[/URL]
    [...]En esta otra página,(vía digg ) ofrecen un manual de como reducir el uso de memoria en Firefox,[...]
  • Martin9sek, on 10/12/2007, -5/+0[URL=http://martin9sek.pijusmagnificus.com/2006/04/05/optimizando/firefox]Martin's Blog[/URL]
    [...]En esta otra pagina,(via digg ) ofrecen un manual de como reducir el uso de memoria en Firefox,[...]
  • Martin9sek, on 10/12/2007, -5/+0MARTIN'S BLOG: http://martin9sek.pijusmagnificus.com/2006/04/05/optimizando/firefox
    [...]En esta otra página,(vía digg ) ofrecen un manual de como reducir el uso de memoria en Firefox,[...]
  • Danie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Is there any way of seeing how much memory each extension actually is using?
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.