Discussion in 'PC Hardware' started by Katzenfreund, Oct 7, 2016.
bugger if im gonna open a firefox tweaks topic now
whatever the outcome, as a firefox user, thanks for opening this topic and giving supporting data
Understandable decision, and amusingly put.
standard british vernacular
I did read that in on a german site.
I'm wondering why never noticed that so long time, lol.
And now I finally know why Samsung Magican Show me that on my SSD is 15 TB wrote, after few weeks.
But ya, moving some ISOs killing too.
I changed the value to 6300000, should be enough.
That’s how I feel, nothing to lose really. And it’s not necessary to increase the value dramatically, just doubling it should have an appreciable effect. A friend of mine on another board who increased it to 600,000 ms did not notice any adverse effects.
But something else has come to my mind. My old XP computer was rather tight on resources and thus sensitive to demanding apps. So after some time, Firefox would get sluggish and I’d switch to another browser. At the time, I thought my computer was allergic to Ff, but in the light of this info, this might well be the cause. Only it’s not easily noticeable on today’s fast computers with plenty or resources to spare.
having changed my value to 15 minutes, ive not noticed any ill effects, so im gonna double it and see what happens
now set to 2 hours
My clear statement is not made to be offensive
If it appears that way I want to apologize.
The article offers a way to reduce to 'wear out' the SSD which cannot be harmful.
Anyway I can not confirm practical bad influences on SSD using FF at default.
This tweak is nice but has a drawback: it will break the session recovery function.
I would like to know where (in which folder) the browser.sessionstore data is written. Most of my browsers cache their data in a RAM disk, so...
so what ff crashes, i have a memory and bookmarks.
if you cant wemember which webpage you was on, something is vewwy vewwy wong
move your firefox profile to a normal hdd if you have one.
Brought over from another thread.
I do not recommend anything. The article recommends what its author considers the best solution, which differs from your suggestion. But you’re free to write your own article or make your own recommendation for which you assume the responsibility.
Personally, I’d advise against disabling or impeding cache, as it will slow down surfing, which the author’s recommendation doesn’t do,
If your read the article (or even my OP summary) again, but more carefully this time, you’ll get the answer to your question, namely that Firefox is not the only culprit, but is considered the worst offender.
Katzenfreund has posted a tweak. supplied supporting data.
adding superflous comments adds nothing really. is this a discussion or is it a how to tweak guide.
if it is primarily a tweak how guide, lock the topic and let it stand on its merits. arguing for and against is pointless.
And still do not understand why Firefox needs special attention ? Do you have some special hatred against Firefox?
...which differs from your suggestion - please tell, where is the suggestion?
and the next - you’re free to write your own article or make your own recommendation for which you assume the responsibility. - strange, but here is contrary to the previous one, where you claimed to have been written somewhere already.
And anyway, I want to know why all this only Firefox may do and others do not? Looking forward to your article about this. Do not post copied the texts only.
i rest my case
As you comment without understanding the article or OP or my reply, there's no point in continuing. So I also rest my case and let other visitors to the thread judge.
I certainly will remember this brilliant post while FF crashes with 30 tabs open.
i never have 30 tabs open. tweak works for me, why criticise?
Oh s**t, YES! I forgot that this exist, that solve a lot of problems!
Maybe I will buy more RAM now, man why i forgot this...
30? lol most time I have any 500-800 tabs open...
@Katzenfreund: I'd like to start by saying thank you for posting this article. I especially enjoyed some of the comments posted in that article.
IMHO it's not that much of an issue for an SSD because the processor(s) on SSDs do checking to minimize write access. If the data is already there, then it's not rewritten.
Defragging can break that logic and force a lot of writes which is not good for SSDs.
As far as firefox goes, I have no complaints, with the exception that I don't like the rendering of some pages.
I do, however, like the addons. Especially the youtube downloader and the ad blocking plugin.
I have a SSD, so I set the write interval to a little higher number. Best to err on the side of caution, since I really don't want to replace my SSD right now.
@BrianCohen: Please feel free to start a firefox tweaks thread. I'd like to learn more about it, and hopefully others will chime in and share.