Here is the bug that prompted memshrink: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=656120

eta: and a direct quote:

Robert O'Callahan (:roc) (Mozilla Corporation) 2011-06-15 17:34:47 PDT

We really need this. Without this, it's very difficult for people to distinguish real leaks from late GC (especially if they don't know to click obsessively on the GC buttons in about:memory). Not to mention that it's probably a global performance win anyway to keep the heap down.

Edited by deleted (Sat 27-Aug-11 09:14:20)

Hmm.

Firefox's memory usage may increase if it's left open for long periods of time. A workaround for this is to periodically restart Firefox.

I'm sure that you have some circumlocution to describe what anyone else would call a memory leak.

Getting desperate now AEP. Try reading the actual article you link to, where it says to disable the addons that are causing the memory build up. Firefox itself has no memory leaks.

Edited by deleted (Sat 27-Aug-11 09:47:56)

Firefox itself has no memory leaks.

Sometimes you sound just like one of those Apple fans.

Define efficient. Reducing peak memory usage, generally speaking, is not something worth spending money on nowadays given that the memory capacity of most PCs far exceeds the requirements of the applications that run on it. If you're hitting paging problems with your PC then you need to install more memory. Having Mozilla waste thousands of man hours shaving x% off peak memory is not going to solve your problem.

Okay, it has no blocking memory leak bugs of the scale that would cause significant increases in footprint. Obviously it may have some undiscovered leak somewhere in the code.

Unfortunately, you have defined the approach of many programmers nowadays; if there are performance problems just throw more hardware at it. No wonder we are stuck with so many bloated programs. And no wonder so many programs and websites, designed and tested on highly specified workstations, perform so poorly in the real world.

Sensible use of resources is not something that should demand extra programming effort. With the right approach it should be built in from the start.

It's not a technical trade off it's a commercial one: silicon costs less than people. Ultra high performance or ultra compact code is very expensive to produce and maintain. You can't expect 1980s efficiency from software with 21st century sophistication unless you're willing to pay a lot more for it.

It is most certainly not undiscovered. Several people experience memory leaks with Firefox that are not blamed on addins.

Try to understand that all software and hardware has its faults. We have eonough of people blindly ignoring this fact as it is.

Code doesn't have to be ultra high performance or ultra compact to be efficient. And it costs no more to write good code than bad; in fact it's probably a bit cheaper.