<div dir="ltr"><div><div><div>I would like to see solid data on performance before we commit to shipping this feature. <br></div>It might be better to pull back now and rewrite this as a WebExtension, and delay shipping the feature. That would be better than getting closer to the 57 timeframe and then realizing we can't ship because of perf issues. I like the feature myself, and respect all the work that went into A/B testing. But we have a lot of engineers here giving good advice about not planning new features that use SDK, so I think we should address the issue as quickly as possible before planning goes further. <br><br></div>Best,<br><br></div>Liz<br> <br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 11:11 AM, Ehsan Akhgari <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ehsan.akhgari@gmail.com" target="_blank">ehsan.akhgari@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Just discussing the startup performance, given the lengths to which we're willing to travel (bug 1336227) for Quantum, we should definitely not knowingly make it slower... :(<br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 2:01 PM, Kris Maglione <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:kmaglione@mozilla.com" target="_blank">kmaglione@mozilla.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Based on the performance measurements that I did with the profiler and hand instrumenting a few months ago, I can say that this *does* slow down the browser for common use cases. Unless something has changed in the mean time, anyway. At every startup, even in my relatively bare bones testing profile (on my relatively high end developer machine), this add-on was the biggest source of startup jank. Bigger than any other Test Pilot add-on, or any in-tree startup code.<br>
<br>
I was only profiling startup performance, at that point, though, so I can't say what effect it had during the rest of the browser session. I do know that even basic uses of many SDK APIs do tend to have a noticeable effect on runtime performance, though.<span class="m_2299198198210119150HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
-Kris</font></span><div><div class="h5"><div class="m_2299198198210119150HOEnZb"><div class="m_2299198198210119150h5"><br>
<br>
On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 01:43:43PM -0500, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
I second Kris' concern about the performance of code using the add-on SDK.<br>
What types of performance measurements have been done about this feature?<br>
Do we know for certain that shipping this doesn't slow down the browser for<br>
common use cases. I'm asking because I encountered a performance problem<br>
with the add-on SDK just this morning which seems to slow down opening new<br>
tabs (bug 1339483) and we encountered a massive startup regression with the<br>
add-on SDK as well (bug 1308332.)<br>
<br>
As part of the Quantum project we are actively working on improving the<br>
performance of the browser, which makes now an exceptionally unfortunate<br>
time for introducing features that may slow down the browser.<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
Ehsan<br>
<br>
On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 10:49 PM, Kris Maglione <<a href="mailto:kmaglione@mozilla.com" target="_blank">kmaglione@mozilla.com</a>><br>
wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 09:21:09PM -0500, Tim Spurway wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
My understanding is that System Add-ons can use the SDK for the time<br>
being (post 57), but yeah, we certainly have to look at WebExtensions and<br>
figure out a migration strategy.<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
System extensions will still be able to be implemented as privileged,<br>
bootstrapped extensions post 57, but the current plan is to stop shipping<br>
the SDK when we turn off support for legacy add-ons.<br>
<br>
But regardless of whether that happens, we shouldn't be shipping new<br>
system add-ons that use the SDK in the mean time, if we can possibly help<br>
it. The performance overhead is bad enough when it only applies to the<br>
subset of users who deliberately install those add-ons. Inflicting it on<br>
all of our users is a completely different matter.<br>
</blockquote></blockquote>
</div></div></div></div></blockquote></div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><div class="m_2299198198210119150gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr">Ehsan<br></div></div>
</font></span></div>
<br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
firefox-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:firefox-dev@mozilla.org">firefox-dev@mozilla.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/firefox-dev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mail.mozilla.org/<wbr>listinfo/firefox-dev</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div>----<br></div>Liz Henry (:lizzard)<br></div><div>Firefox Release Manager<br></div><a href="mailto:lhenry@mozilla.com" target="_blank">lhenry@mozilla.com</a><br></div></div></div></div>
</div>