Closed Bug 1520227 Opened 3 years ago Closed 3 years ago

Increase process count to 8

Categories

(Core :: DOM: Content Processes, enhancement)

40 Branch
enhancement
Not set
normal

Tracking

()

RESOLVED FIXED
mozilla66
Tracking Status
relnote-firefox --- 66+
firefox66 --- fixed

People

(Reporter: erahm, Assigned: erahm)

References

Details

Attachments

(1 file)

In bug 1470280 we upped to the process count to 8 for nightly only and now we'd like this to ride the trains. A shield study was done on release in bug 1511183 to test both 8 and 16 content processes and we're happy with the results for 8.

Attachment #9036639 - Flags: review?(felipc)
Assignee: nobody → erahm
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Attachment #9036639 - Flags: review?(felipc) → review+
Pushed by erahm@mozilla.com:
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/4a676bd0d103
Increase content process count to 8. r=felipe
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 3 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla66

Liz, FYI, maybe that should be in Beta relnotes?

Flags: needinfo?(lhenry)

Adding relnote, as new, "Increase content processes to 8"

Eric, do you have any sort of documentation or blog posts that might be interesting for beta users?

Flags: needinfo?(lhenry) → needinfo?(erahm)

^I'd sure hope so too.

I don't have hard numbers myself (do you at least, with that new MEMORY_TOTAL telemetry?), but after a couple of hours of browsing today... I was kinda feeling some "newfound" paging activity. Ie. I had just updated to 66.

I can somewhat understand the reasons of bug 1399962, comment 31 then, I won't be going to complain.. But it should be advertised that any remotely pissed user, still has the full choice of deciding whether that slim security benefit is worth it or not.

(In reply to Liz Henry (:lizzard) (use needinfo) from comment #5)

Adding relnote, as new, "Increase content processes to 8"

Eric, do you have any sort of documentation or blog posts that might be interesting for beta users?

There's no one source of info for this unfortunately. I can try to put together a blog post next week explaining that it turns out to be a wash memory-wise if we compare against a year ago. Leaving ni? for that. This AWSY graph for beta is essentially what I'll write about. I'll also include details about the extended testing on nightly and our shield studies on release.

See Also: → 1530096

Hi Eric, any progress on the blog post? I'd love to have something to link to . Can you suggest a better wording for a release note as well?

Flags: needinfo?(erahm)
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.