Basilisk Slow Disk/System I/O (page loading/display OK)? Topic is solved

[kelendral]

Basilisk Slow Disk/System I/O (page loading/display OK)?
I am trying to trace down if anyone else has noticed some slower I/O with Basilisk as compared to Palemoon.

Some examples:
Created a new session with 1000 total tabs. Close browser, open browser, reloading the previous session (1000 tabs load with 1 active).
Session loads in 30 seconds (+/- 2 seconds) in Palemoon, but well over 2 minutes in Basilisk

FEBE Backup of a Profile and about 2.5GB of external manually selected files:
Completes in under 90 seconds thus no script timeout warnings in Palemoon
Takes almost 7 minutes in Basilisk - had to extended the script timeout setting to 900 seconds to avoid timeouts during backup (FEBE has a setting for doing this then restoring the default when backup done).

PLEASE NOTE that it is only in these 2 extreme example types I can see the differences. In most normal browser usage I see no major differences. Example pages seem to load and render about the same speed just based on silly eyeballing, no actual measurements.

Edit: additional information: Windows 64bit version of Basilisk on Win7. FEBE tests were done with clean profiles only FEBE installed, using an exported/imported set of FEBE preferences.

[Moonchild]

Basilisk still has a ton of mozilla crap in it that needs to be weeded out from the platform. Expect things like these to improve over time.

[dodona]

Some examples:
Created a new session with 1000 total tabs.

unrealistic scenario.

[kelendral]

Some examples:
Created a new session with 1000 total tabs.

unrealistic scenario.

You're right, I usually only have between 400 to 600 tabs. Although one can notice the difference starting around 250 tabs, I didn't try less since I've not had a saved session under that amount in years.
I like overhead in my tests and that's a nice round number that exceeds my tracked single window stats by 17%.

[SpockFan02]

... I usually only have between 400 to 600 tabs.

That's hard-core! I've usually got between 90 and 140-ish.

[New Tobin Paradigm]

My all time max in normal operations not related to testing is perhaps 25.. Normally 2-10.

It is my opinion people have come to abuse tabbed browsing especially when session store became a thing because I doubt people would have 150 to 6000 windows open if there was no tabbed browsing.. Why would anyone have that many sites open at once anyway?

Use bookmarks for crying out loud guys..

[kelendral]

I prefer Saved Sessions over bookmarks.
It allows me to save not only the pages for the topic I am researching, but the ebb and flow of thought and the trail that led to those pages.
Especially when combined with Tab Kit (vertical tree tabs). With the Highlighter installed the groups are even color coded.

Yes, I would say I am horribly abusive of tabbed browsing and saved sessions. I don't deny it one bit. The web, the way I want it.

Thanks to all you helpful folks.

[Moonchild]

Please understand that every tab you have open means a document of arbitrary length and content is loaded.
When you open a Word Processor, do you always open every document you have ever opened before? Have you tried this? Have you seen how unresponsive your system gets after you open more than 50 documents (if you can reach that far...)?

So, don't be terribly surprised if speed drops when the browser is tasked to manage 600 tabs. It quite out of scope for normal web use.

[kelendral]

Actually, Pale Moon and Basilisk are quite fine and very responsive once everything is up and loaded. Even after I've hit more than 100 activated tabs out of few hundred loaded. Both Pale Moon and Basilisk are amazing in this regard (obviously one needs the memory to load all that which is why I run 64bit all the way with lots of RAM).

It is only the startup (when is only loading the tab titles with icons, and activating/loading the first tab) where Basilisk takes far longer.

The other time is when doing file backup operations, where in FEBE I have told it to add additional files in the amount of about 2.5GB (which get compressed) that Basilisk spends more time.

These are the only 2 situations any significant or repeatable negative performance when compared to Pale Moon. Pale Moon does so well in these areas it has probably spoiled me (to be quite honest).

I fully admit my usage is not only a-typical, it is probably an obscene abuse of web browser usage as compared to the intended general audience.

[adesh]

additional files in the amount of about 2.5GB (which get compressed)

Off-topic:
That is too much for a browser profile. So, just curious, what is the data you are storing in your profile?

[kelendral]

additional files in the amount of about 2.5GB (which get compressed)

Off-topic:
That is too much for a browser profile. So, just curious, what is the data you are storing in your profile?

Off-topic:
Pretty much just what it says, additional files selected via What to Back Up > User Defined. By doing so and having the backup sent to the NAS, no need to install some other backup software for the small (relatively) amount of files and folders needed to be preserved.