951955 - Unexpected memory consumption and CPU cycles associated with website "nola.com"

Status: RESOLVED WORKSFORME

(Firefox :: Untriaged, defect)

Description

[john]

User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.2; WOW64; rv:25.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/25.0 (Beta/Release)
Build ID: 20131112160018

Steps to reproduce:

Visit the website NOLA.Com, and then open subsequent tabs using URLs showing within that first page.   Leave the tabs up for some period, and watch the CPU usage and the Memory consumed using the Task Manager


Actual results:

The memory shoots way high, quickly to 500 MB or more.   CPU use hovers at 3 to 5 percent.   The CPU use could be explained, in part, by adverts, as might the memory.

However, sometimes, the numbers continue to climb, memory higher, and CPU use higher till the system locks up (with CPU up at 40 percent, for example).

In an attempt to get rid of the offensive, and odd, advertising schema, using Adblock and Ghostery to claim down on everything proves useless, or worse, quickly rising CPU and memory to 1GB without fail, leading to crash or necessitating manual shutdown of the Fox program.  Sometimes, this crash, or the manual shutdown of Fox using task manager leaves 2 leaves of Adobe Flash, within the task manager, even though Fox is gone.

With full use of Adblock and Ghostery, I noticed a top blank line which was not removed, and which appeared to behave oddly (as if reloading, and causing the balance of the content to shift up and back).   Using Adblock remove element successfully removes the top black element, but does not end the memory consumption running up.


Expected results:

Something other than the above, I suspect....

Note: I've noticed this problem before ver 25, going back a few versions.
Note: While the unrestrained memory consumption disappears with Adblock and Ghostery disabled, the memory does climb way high, and the system CPU runs high.

Comment 1

[Wayne Mery (:wsmwk)]

Ghostery is known to have had issues.

Comment 2

[Matthias Versen [:Matti]]

Reporter: Is this still an issue ?

Comment 3

[john]

The climbing memory, and high CPU, experienced with this particular website, and others, at/before the time of the report, no longer seem to be an issue in the more recent version(s)

I am closing the bug.