
Firefox 54 goes multi-process, eight years after work began - agd
https://arstechnica.co.uk/information-technology/2017/06/firefox-multiple-content-processes/
======
pvdebbe
Previous discussion:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14547559](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14547559)

------
mikeecb
One of the reasons the Chrome browser uses one process per tab is so that
memory between web-pages is isolated. By doing this, an attacker in control of
a renderer process cannot read data from another renderer process (web-page).

It seems like Firefox has made a security / memory tradeoff here since
renderer processes can render multiple (4 by default) web-pages at a time.

~~~
chimeracoder
> One of the reasons the Chrome browser uses one process per tab

Chrome does not use a process per tab. It uses a process per _domain_
(mostly), unless you middle click a link in which case it always shares the
same process as the original tab.

~~~
bzbarsky
> It uses a process per domain (mostly)

No, that's not quite right. What they do really is closer to proces-per-tab
(with some complications around cross-site navigation) unless you have more
than some number of tabs, in which case they will just have them share
processes. See [https://www.chromium.org/developers/design-
documents/process...](https://www.chromium.org/developers/design-
documents/process-models) and note that the default is to put multiple
"independent" instances of the same site in different processes, even though
they're same-domain. What you're describing is the non-default "Process-per-
site" model.

> unless you middle click a link in which case it always shares the same
> process as the original tab

I believe they changed that behavior starting with Chrome 60. See
[https://codereview.chromium.org/2680353005/](https://codereview.chromium.org/2680353005/)
which talks about ctrl-click, but I would assume (watch me turn out to be
wrong!) that middle-click takes the same codepath.

------
TokenDiversity
Those wanting to quickly disable electrolysis for whatever reason- go to
about:config and set browser.tabs.remote.autostart to false.

If you have an incompatible addon, you'll still not be on the multi-process
train.

I don't know how to find which add-on is incompatible though (yet)

~~~
pricechild
[https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/add-on-
compat...](https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/add-on-
compatibility-reporter/) will tell you.

~~~
Tepix
But is that add-on multiprocessCompatible itself? :-)

~~~
MagnumOpus
Install it and it will tell you!

(Spoiler: it is)

------
dezzeus
I've given it a try, but macOS's "activity monitor" reports a very high energy
consumption, so to me it's a big no (being on a laptop).

I've filled a "feedback" about that within the browser UI…

~~~
cptskippy
That's largely true of any browser that isn't Safari on MacOS or Edge on
Windows 10.

~~~
dezzeus
That's sadly true, but the reported values were pretty high (~45), even when
in idle (~15) with a couple of tabs.

At the moment my "sweet spot" is on Opera with the "battery saver" mode.

~~~
dingaling
Was one of the idle tabs Google search results perchance?

There is some deep and dank JS on that page that makes FF loop constantly when
'idle' on that page, at least on Linux. I had to disable JS for google.com so
that I could read search results without fan noise.

~~~
dezzeus
IIRC, yes. I should check again…

------
RockyMcNuts
Now it can end battery life as we know it even faster. (On Mac it pegs CPU
multiple times a day and I have to kill it. Never happens with Chrome)

------
nolok
If you could be bothered to read the article, their approach and solution to
this problem is detailed the third paragraph. If you don't bother reading,
please abstain from asking question that are so clearly answered ...

~~~
srean
You caught me there. Nowadays I read the comments first before I read the
actual post.

~~~
jvzr
And you reply as well, which may the worst offense of the two. Albeit an
insignificantly small offense in the grand scheme of things.

------
ungzd
> In theory, moving to multiple content processes will improve stability and
> performance (one bad tab won't slow down the rest of your computer)

So starting more processes makes other apps (not firefox) less slow? Are
Arstechnica authors at least experienced PC users and know what is process,
what is web browser? Do they use IE or Safari because it's default and it's an
icon for internet? I wonder how high level of tech incompetence in all these
tech press. Just mindless rewording of release notes every time.

Also, regarding that diagram: in fact, multiple Chrome tabs can be handled by
single process, you can see it in Chrome's task manager.

~~~
majewsky
I suppose they're including the other tabs in that browser in their definition
of "the rest of your computer", which seems very reasonable.

------
jswny
This sounds fantastic and I really can't wait to try it! However, does anyone
else find themselves unable to switch away from Chrome due to the slickness? I
find the overall design (and especially the design of the tabs) to be __far
__more slick in Chrome than in Firefox. For me, the Firefox interface just
feels dated and cluttered compared to the clean experience of Chrome. However,
I am very wary of relying on Google for so many things so I 'm absolutely
going to give this new Firefox version a try.

~~~
FnuGk
I am a long time firefox user and i feel that firefox looks better than
chrome. So it might just be what you are used to.

Also i am on macOS, maybe firefox doesnt look as good on your platform?

------
srean
Well, 800 tabs open is business as usual for me, wonder what it will do in
this case.

Edit: I get downvoted to oblivion whenever I mention this usecase on HN. Its
no different this time but so be it (given the negative karma I have ratched
up, I wonder why the thread is even visible. Perhaps because many have
commented on it. A new HN UI feature, I suppose).

FF is the only browser that has worked well with this rather unusual usage
pattern, so am ever so thankful to Mozilla folks. I do a lot of reading and it
seriously helps. For those who are feeling exceptionally trigger happy, its
not that unusual an usage pattern if you ask around.

~~~
mwidell
Just out of curiosity, why would you want to have 800 open tabs? What is your
workflow? Do you use tabs as bookmarks? How do you find open tabs?

~~~
srean
Yeah they are like a volatile bookmarks with a traversable history and a 'this
is very interesting but have to save the reading for later' todo list.

Once you bookmark a link the history-browsing-trajectory is lost. However once
I visit a tab often it becomes a bookmark.

There are extensions to organize and search bookmarks.

~~~
proaralyst
How do you navigate between your tabs?

~~~
bzbarsky
If you type something in the Firefox url bar starting with a "% " (percent,
then space) the rest of the string will be treated as a search across the
titles and urls of your open tabs. This is what I typically use for
navigation.

