Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Sep 9, 2022. It is now read-only.

Manual update shouldn't take so much time on all browsers except Safari #998

Closed
Mikey1993 opened this issue Mar 12, 2015 · 4 comments
Closed

Comments

@Mikey1993
Copy link
Contributor

After the change that has made to workaround a bug in Safari #978 ,
there is a wait time between each downloaded list, which I think should be lower or non existent to other browsers except of Safari.

Most of us don't have connection issues, and I think there is a possibility to lower this value for most of the users, except of the ones of Safari.

@chrisaljoudi
Copy link
Contributor

It's worth noting, however, the sequential downloading itself has benefits across all browsers (a quick benchmark on Chrome 41 here reveals that uBlock's peak memory usage is 30% less if the updates are done sequentially vs. all at once).

@Mikey1993
Copy link
Contributor Author

Just wanted to mention: this has nothing to do with connection issues.

I have mentioned this to emphasize that there is no real deal breaker in reverting to the previous update mechanism on browsers other than Safari.

a quick benchmark on Chrome 41 here reveals that uBlock's peak memory usage is 30% less if the updates are done sequentially vs. all at once.

Right, that's nice, but isn't the 30% difference in memory drops down after a couple of garbage collections?

Anyhow, even lowering the delay time to half of what is on Safari could gain some nice numbers in the memory compartment, and not to slow down by a high factor (depends on the number of the lists you have) the update mechanism on all other browsers.

@gorhill
Copy link
Contributor

gorhill commented Mar 12, 2015

should be lower or non existent to other browsers except of Safari

No. by design. if you end up flushing all caches and forcing an update all the time, this is really bad, you should not do so by respect for remote servers who host for free the filter lists.

@gorhill gorhill closed this as completed Mar 12, 2015
@gorhill
Copy link
Contributor

gorhill commented Mar 12, 2015

For the record, benefits of the current way:

  • Lower CPU/memory resource peak
  • Beneficial to users with slower connections Correcting myself: actually the beneficial part is to not download more than one at the same time, not the delay in between.
  • Beneficial to remote servers: the : "update slowness" acts as a deterrent for those who would abusively update their filter lists too often
    • Unless there is a specific filter list known to have a specific fix which is sought after by a user, there is no point in updating all filter lists all the time

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants