Comments on: The footprint of the Air Ajax runtime http://blog.julienviet.com/2008/08/21/air-ajax-runtime-footprint/ A pure technical trip Sun, 01 Aug 2010 06:13:19 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: Julien Viet http://blog.julienviet.com/2008/08/21/air-ajax-runtime-footprint/#comment-17 Julien Viet Fri, 22 Aug 2008 13:53:41 +0000 http://blog.julienviet.com/?p=23#comment-17 @Finkler: I agree with you that 20megs is not the fundamental problem. For me the most problematic issue is the CPU consumed. Spaz itself consumes around 10% of my CPU even if it does not seem active (i.e just waiting the next refresh). About the leak, indeed the memory consumed seems to increase and Adobe does not provide the tools or the hooks (à la Java VM instrumentation) to properly know what happens. @Finkler: I agree with you that 20megs is not the fundamental problem. For me the most problematic issue is the CPU consumed. Spaz itself consumes around 10% of my CPU even if it does not seem active (i.e just waiting the next refresh). About the leak, indeed the memory consumed seems to increase and Adobe does not provide the tools or the hooks (à la Java VM instrumentation) to properly know what happens.

]]> By: Ed Finkler http://blog.julienviet.com/2008/08/21/air-ajax-runtime-footprint/#comment-16 Ed Finkler Fri, 22 Aug 2008 13:50:09 +0000 http://blog.julienviet.com/?p=23#comment-16 AIR itself isn't slim, for sure. Instantiating a webkit instance makes it even bigger, though, but that's not surprising: browser engines are not lightweight. What is particularly problematic is that there seem to be memory leaks within the webkit engine as used in AIR, and there is no way to profile memory usage. Apps like Spaz run into this problem because it's constantly pulling in large amounts of new data, loading new images, and the like. Also note that the CPU usage while idling is particularly a problem with OS X. On Windows, AIR seems to not have this problem. I don't think using 20MB or more is horrible, considering the technology. AIR is a full Flash runtime, and HTML apps add a webkit renderer on top of that. The memory and CPU usage is in line -- or a bit lower -- than most SSBs. Using traditional browser tech to build a desktop app is going to be a tradeoff in terms of memory and CPU usage, no doubt. AIR itself isn’t slim, for sure. Instantiating a webkit instance makes it even bigger, though, but that’s not surprising: browser engines are not lightweight. What is particularly problematic is that there seem to be memory leaks within the webkit engine as used in AIR, and there is no way to profile memory usage. Apps like Spaz run into this problem because it’s constantly pulling in large amounts of new data, loading new images, and the like.

Also note that the CPU usage while idling is particularly a problem with OS X. On Windows, AIR seems to not have this problem.

I don’t think using 20MB or more is horrible, considering the technology. AIR is a full Flash runtime, and HTML apps add a webkit renderer on top of that. The memory and CPU usage is in line — or a bit lower — than most SSBs. Using traditional browser tech to build a desktop app is going to be a tradeoff in terms of memory and CPU usage, no doubt.

]]> By: Chui Tey http://blog.julienviet.com/2008/08/21/air-ajax-runtime-footprint/#comment-15 Chui Tey Fri, 22 Aug 2008 12:35:10 +0000 http://blog.julienviet.com/?p=23#comment-15 JavaFX is pretty fat too. There isn't a base CPU load, but 30 Mbs RAM on a hello world app is not uncommon. JavaFX is pretty fat too. There isn’t a base CPU load, but 30 Mbs RAM on a hello world app is not uncommon.

]]> By: Gaurav http://blog.julienviet.com/2008/08/21/air-ajax-runtime-footprint/#comment-14 Gaurav Fri, 22 Aug 2008 08:41:43 +0000 http://blog.julienviet.com/?p=23#comment-14 Yes, it does take 20 megs. I tried it out too. Its fault on the part of the air runtime definitely. Yes, it does take 20 megs. I tried it out too. Its fault on the part of the air runtime definitely.

]]> By: Michael Neale http://blog.julienviet.com/2008/08/21/air-ajax-runtime-footprint/#comment-13 Michael Neale Fri, 22 Aug 2008 03:46:15 +0000 http://blog.julienviet.com/?p=23#comment-13 Twirl is a hog too - 10% CPU, 60+ meg. Twirl is a hog too - 10% CPU, 60+ meg.

]]> By: Julien Viet http://blog.julienviet.com/2008/08/21/air-ajax-runtime-footprint/#comment-12 Julien Viet Thu, 21 Aug 2008 22:03:14 +0000 http://blog.julienviet.com/?p=23#comment-12 @duff : hard to know as the memory footprint is global @zack : with twhirl what is the idle CPU time used ? @duff : hard to know as the memory footprint is global
@zack : with twhirl what is the idle CPU time used ?

]]> By: duff http://blog.julienviet.com/2008/08/21/air-ajax-runtime-footprint/#comment-11 duff Thu, 21 Aug 2008 20:34:45 +0000 http://blog.julienviet.com/?p=23#comment-11 So, is the fault specific to AIR, or the use of WebKit? So, is the fault specific to AIR, or the use of WebKit?

]]> By: zack http://blog.julienviet.com/2008/08/21/air-ajax-runtime-footprint/#comment-10 zack Thu, 21 Aug 2008 20:14:15 +0000 http://blog.julienviet.com/?p=23#comment-10 you know what's weird though. I experienced a ton of issues with Spaz, and while they may be runtime related, I haven't had a single resource issue/problem with twhirl (also AIR). you know what’s weird though. I experienced a ton of issues with Spaz, and while they may be runtime related, I haven’t had a single resource issue/problem with twhirl (also AIR).

]]>