Page 1 of 1

NoScript 2.9.5rc24 and above slows browser

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2016 5:50 pm
by McPhiil
For sure with Firefox 50.x but maybe older versions as well, but sincethe 2.5 NoScript train came out, my browser is slower. If I back rev to NoScript 2.9.0.14 everything works great. It is REALY noticible on my log manger site (QRadar). I get a live stream of log events that scrolls past at about 1000 events per second. NO browser displays them all but FF and Chrome will put up a good effort. However when any of the 2.9.X NoScript versions are installed, the log updates are capped at about 100 events per second and the whole site crawls to a halt. Other tabs also experience the slowdown. Other browsers on the same host at the same time work just fine. I have tested this on both Windows and OSX, both exhibit the problem and both will get better when I disable or downgrade NoScript.

What feature of NoScript would be most impacted by sites with a high refresh rate?

-McPhil

Re: NoScript 2.9.5rc24 and above slows browser

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2016 8:25 pm
by therube
Are you running 32 or 64-bit FF?

Do you have e10s enabled in FF?

Re: NoScript 2.9.5rc24 and above slows browser

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2016 8:41 pm
by barbaz
therube wrote:Are you running 32 or 64-bit FF?
They've got 32-bit FF -
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:50.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/50.0

Re: NoScript 2.9.5rc24 and above slows browser

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2016 9:56 pm
by McPhiil
As was pointed out 32-bit FF. Also about:support says - Multiprocess Windows: 0/1 (Disabled by add-ons)

So e10s is disabled. Should it be on?

McPhil

Re: NoScript 2.9.5rc24 and above slows browser

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2016 10:03 pm
by barbaz
NoScript is now supposed to be e10s-compatible starting with v 2.9.5, so you could try enabling it to see what performance is like. But first be sure to disable addons that are not e10s-ready, though. Those could just make the performance even worse with e10s enabled.

Do remember that whether e10s brings an improvement or not, this is still not right.