Author Topic: How..is..this..possible?! (Read 9376 times)

rabbit · « **on:** March 30, 2006, 12:26:05 pm »

WHAT THE FUCK?!

MyndFyre · « **Reply #1 on:** March 30, 2006, 03:47:40 pm »

LOLOLOL pwnted by IE. G_G

Blaze · « **Reply #2 on:** March 30, 2006, 03:53:07 pm »

Why are you using taskmgr AND procxp?

Yeah, I have 20 gb of virtual memory dedicated, you just have lots of stuff in your cache.

Sidoh · « **Reply #3 on:** March 30, 2006, 03:57:38 pm »

Quote from: Blaze on March 30, 2006, 03:53:07 pm

Why are you using taskmgr AND procxp?

Yeah, I have 20 gb of virtual memory dedicated, you just have lots of stuff in your cache.

Why do you set a static limit on your virutal memory? There is a "system managed" option, you know.

. I do believe it allocates as much hard drive space as you tell it to when you specify an upper limit, which is why I choose not to.

That said, firefox should be caching data of that size on the filesystem, not in virtual memory, I'd say (they're pretty much the same thing, but the filesystem obviously almost always has more space to spare).

rabbit · « **Reply #4 on:** March 30, 2006, 05:25:57 pm »

It was slowing down my computer. I was trying to bring up *any* button-combo-kill-processes-program (Process Explorer is set to Ctrl+Alt+End) so I could kill it.

iago · « **Reply #5 on:** March 30, 2006, 08:19:15 pm »

Firefox can use a lot of memory if you have a lot of tabs with a lot of history/cached data. People hold it against FireFox, but using extra memory for the history of each tab is logical.

If that's not the case, then it was probably a glitch/bug. Figure out how to replicate it and report it to Mozilla. They're usually pretty good about fixing that kind of thing.

Armin · « **Reply #6 on:** March 31, 2006, 12:58:17 am »

Quote from: Sidoh on March 30, 2006, 03:57:38 pm

Quote from: Blaze on March 30, 2006, 03:53:07 pm
Why are you using taskmgr AND procxp?

Yeah, I have 20 gb of virtual memory dedicated, you just have lots of stuff in your cache.

Why do you set a static limit on your virutal memory? There is a "system managed" option, you know. . I do believe it allocates as much hard drive space as you tell it to when you specify an upper limit, which is why I choose not to.

That said, firefox should be caching data of that size on the filesystem, not in virtual memory, I'd say (they're pretty much the same thing, but the filesystem obviously almost always has more space to spare).

I'm not quite sure about that, but I know one way to make sure that it doesn't do that, even if you do specify an upper limit. Go to "Start", "Run", and type in SYSEDIT. Focus to the SYSTEM.INI file, and under [386Enh], type ConservativeSwapfileUsage=1. This way, Windows will use RAM as memory until it's full, then it will use virtual memory.

Sidoh · « **Reply #7 on:** March 31, 2006, 01:03:28 am »

Quote from: MetaL MilitiA on March 31, 2006, 12:58:17 am

I'm not quite sure about that, but I know one way to make sure that it doesn't do that, even if you do specify an upper limit. Go to "Start", "Run", and type in SYSEDIT. Focus to the SYSTEM.INI file, and under [386Enh], type ConservativeSwapfileUsage=1. This way, Windows will use RAM as memory until it's full, then it will use virtual memory.

To me, that seems really, really stupid. Virutal Memory is much more expendable than physical memory.

edit -- I'm quite computer literate. I don't need idiotproof steps.

wires · « **Reply #8 on:** March 31, 2006, 07:24:25 am »

Quote from: Sidoh on March 31, 2006, 01:03:28 am

Quote from: MetaL MilitiA on March 31, 2006, 12:58:17 am
I'm not quite sure about that, but I know one way to make sure that it doesn't do that, even if you do specify an upper limit. Go to "Start", "Run", and type in SYSEDIT. Focus to the SYSTEM.INI file, and under [386Enh], type ConservativeSwapfileUsage=1. This way, Windows will use RAM as memory until it's full, then it will use virtual memory.

To me, that seems really, really stupid. Virutal Memory is much more expendable than physical memory.

edit -- I'm quite computer literate. I don't need idiotproof steps.

Someone else that is reading this thread might though.

Armin · « **Reply #9 on:** March 31, 2006, 08:43:41 am »

Quote from: Sidoh on March 31, 2006, 01:03:28 am

Quote from: MetaL MilitiA on March 31, 2006, 12:58:17 am
I'm not quite sure about that, but I know one way to make sure that it doesn't do that, even if you do specify an upper limit. Go to "Start", "Run", and type in SYSEDIT. Focus to the SYSTEM.INI file, and under [386Enh], type ConservativeSwapfileUsage=1. This way, Windows will use RAM as memory until it's full, then it will use virtual memory.

To me, that seems really, really stupid. Virutal Memory is much more expendable than physical memory.

Yeah, it is. RAM is MUCH faster than virtual memory. The computer acesses RAM in nanoseconds, while it acesses the fastest IDE harddrives in milliseconds.

Quote

edit -- I'm quite computer literate. I don't need idiotproof steps.

I'm sorry, next time I'll get the perfect amount of steps that matches your knowledge of computers the best, because I know exactly what you know about this specific subject. And like WiRes said, I posted it for other people as well.

rabbit · « **Reply #10 on:** March 31, 2006, 09:35:12 am »

Quote from: iago on March 30, 2006, 08:19:15 pm

Firefox can use a lot of memory if you have a lot of tabs with a lot of history/cached data. People hold it against FireFox, but using extra memory for the history of each tab is logical.

If that's not the case, then it was probably a glitch/bug. Figure out how to replicate it and report it to Mozilla. They're usually pretty good about fixing that kind of thing.

I didn't have any tabs open, but I'll see if I can replicate it.

igimo1 · « **Reply #11 on:** March 31, 2006, 06:33:12 pm »

Opera

Sidoh · « **Reply #12 on:** March 31, 2006, 06:38:57 pm »

Quote from: MetaL MilitiA on March 31, 2006, 08:43:41 am

Yeah, it is. RAM is MUCH faster than virtual memory. The computer acesses RAM in nanoseconds, while it acesses the fastest IDE harddrives in milliseconds.

I know...

Quote from: MetaL MilitiA on March 31, 2006, 08:43:41 am

I'm sorry, next time I'll get the perfect amount of steps that matches your knowledge of computers the best, because I know exactly what you know about this specific subject. And like WiRes said, I posted it for other people as well.

You could have specified. Since you were quoting me, it kind of made it seem like you were treating me like an idiot.

Quote from: Topaz on March 31, 2006, 06:33:12 pm

Opera

I LOVE OPERA.

rabbit · « **Reply #13 on:** March 31, 2006, 07:26:42 pm »

Quote from: Topaz on March 31, 2006, 06:33:12 pm

Opera

..."has ads". I like Firefox, thanks.

Sidoh · « **Reply #14 on:** March 31, 2006, 07:35:10 pm »

Quote from: rabbit on March 31, 2006, 07:26:42 pm

Quote from: Topaz on March 31, 2006, 06:33:12 pm
Opera
..."has ads". I like Firefox, thanks.

Bull shit it does.

igimo1 · « **Reply #15 on:** March 31, 2006, 08:06:24 pm »

Quote from: rabbit on March 31, 2006, 07:26:42 pm

Quote from: Topaz on March 31, 2006, 06:33:12 pm
Opera
..."has ads". I like Firefox, thanks.

I see... no ads. Why don't you try Opera instead of repeating hearsay?

rabbit · « **Reply #16 on:** March 31, 2006, 10:39:24 pm »

I've already tried Opera in the recent past, and I've already rejected it. Thanks.

Feanor · « **Reply #17 on:** March 31, 2006, 10:44:27 pm »

Virtual memory is for bitches anyways.

Sidoh · « **Reply #18 on:** March 31, 2006, 10:46:42 pm »

Quote from: rabbit on March 31, 2006, 10:39:24 pm

I've already tried Opera in the recent past, and I've already rejected it. Thanks.

I will say from personal experience (subjectively, of course):

Opera > FF

Ergot · « **Reply #19 on:** April 01, 2006, 03:47:20 am »

Quote from: Topaz on March 31, 2006, 08:06:24 pm

Quote from: rabbit on March 31, 2006, 07:26:42 pm
Quote from: Topaz on March 31, 2006, 06:33:12 pm
Opera
..."has ads". I like Firefox, thanks.

I see... no ads. Why don't you try Opera instead of repeating hearsay?

I do believe that once upon a time Opera was not free without ads, and you had to pay to get rid of them and extra features.

iago · « **Reply #20 on:** April 01, 2006, 04:19:16 am »

Quote from: Ergot on April 01, 2006, 03:47:20 am

Quote from: Topaz on March 31, 2006, 08:06:24 pm
Quote from: rabbit on March 31, 2006, 07:26:42 pm
Quote from: Topaz on March 31, 2006, 06:33:12 pm
Opera
..."has ads". I like Firefox, thanks.

I see... no ads. Why don't you try Opera instead of repeating hearsay?
I do believe that once upon a time Opera was not free without ads, and you had to pay to get rid of them and extra features.

Correct. Opera no longer has ads.

And I like Opera for some things, but I prefer Firefox for day-to-day use. It's personal preference.

News:

Author Topic: How..is..this..possible?! (Read 9376 times)