946
edits
Places:Performance: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Our history implementation can have a non-trivial impact on the browser's performance, not only when actively browsing history or bookmarks, but also in other areas such as (for example) page load. | Our history implementation can have a non-trivial impact on the browser's performance, not only when actively browsing history or bookmarks, but also in other areas such as (for example) page load. | ||
In the case of page load, one reason for the performance hit is that links must be colored as visited / not visited when displaying a page, which requires going through history (see | In the case of page load, one reason for the performance hit is that links must be colored as visited / not visited when displaying a page, which requires going through history (see [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=329816 Bug #329816]). There may be other performance implications that we do not yet know or anticipate, however (ideas, anyone?). Please update this page as new information (or new doubts/questions) come up. | ||
= Testing Environments = | = Testing Environments = | ||
| Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
= Test Data = | = Test Data = | ||
Brett Wilson spent a good chunk of time optimizing Places. This bug has some test data: | Brett Wilson spent a good chunk of time optimizing Places. This bug has some test data: [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=329816 Bug #329816]. Note that he times the IsVisited call directly, as the page load tests have too much noise to be useful. | ||
Dan Mills did some preliminary pageload tests on a limited set of environments and came up with these results: | Dan Mills did some preliminary pageload tests on a limited set of environments and came up with these results: | ||