Re: Epiphany pixmap storage usage. (Please use xrestop, it is your friend).

[Jim Gettys <Jim Gettys hp com>]

Yup.

Oink, oink, oink.

Use a larger list of more commercial web sites, and you''
chew up 100 megabytes without even thinking about it.

Epiphany seems worse that Moz, but Moz is terrible.

                          - Jim

On Sun, 2004-08-15 at 09:26, Peter Harvey wrote:
> On Sat, 2004-08-14 at 06:31 -0400, Jim Gettys wrote:
> > I was using xrestop (see
> > http://freedesktop.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/xrestop/?root=xapps
> > (xapps/xrestop in freedesktop's CVS).
> > 
> > As far as I can tell, Epiphany is profligate with its use
> > of Pixmap storage in the X server (and in epiphany itself), 
> > and I find no way in the UI
> > to limit this usage.  X only does what it is asked, and
> > epiphany seems to like to use lots of memory.
> 
> Hi Jim,
> 
> I just ran a quick comparison of Firefox and Epiphany (browsing
> www.slashdot.org www.abc.net.au/news www.google.com www.debian.org in
> tabbed mode) and turned up these results from xrestop:
> 
> res-base Wins  GCs Fnts Pxms Misc   Pxm mem  Other   Total   PID Identifier
> 2e00000   113   40    1  155   74     2294K      6K   2300K   ?   Google - Mozilla Firefox
> 2c00000   117   40    1  112   57     2208K      6K   2214K   ?   Google
> 
> Basically, both applications top the list of pixmap usage according to
> xrestop. Is this the resource hogging you were referring to? Was there
> other tests you ran (eg. history window, bookmark editor, opening a
> file)?
> 
> I'm not a proper Epiphany developer, but I think the pixmap usage may be
> a problem with the Mozilla rendering engine and not the Epiphany code
> itself.
> 
> Quoting from http://www.gnomedesktop.org/article.php?sid=1545
>         Many "modern" X11 applications are written with a blatant
>         disregard for latency, round trips, and network bandwidth. They
>         don't work properly with high latencies and are nearly
>         impossible to run over even 10Mbps links. Gnome applications are
>         big offenders, Mozilla is even worse (in fact, one of the
>         Mozilla GUI authors told me that they just don't give a damn
>         about remote usage at all).
> 
> Regards,
> Peter.
>