Firefox is literally destroying your SSD

Firefox is literally destroying your SSD
top fucking kek

servethehome.com/firefox-is-eating-your-ssd-here-is-how-to-fix-it/

Other urls found in this thread:

kb.mozillazine.org/Browser.sessionstore.interval
wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/session_restore
bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1304389
chromium.org/Home/chromium-security/brag-sheet
wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Firefox_on_RAM
zdnet.com/article/ssd-reliability-in-the-real-world-googles-experience/
kb.mozillazine.org/Session_Restore
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

I run Firefox Portable from a RAMdisk even when I have an SSD so this isn't an issue at all.

You suck, OP.

Good thing I don't use Fireshit anymore

except there's literally no alternative to firefox

Keep living in your own delusions

Chromium

Give us one with the same openness and functionnalities.
protip:you can't

>botnetium

Pale Moon is like Firefox when it was still good.

But I never fell for the ssd meme

enjoy your 101545375 vulnerabilities that will never be fixed because the devs are incompetents.

how do you screencap the whole page like that?

On firefox:
shift + F2 -> screenshot --fullpage firefox.png

No idea how to do it on other browsers.

thanks user, good to know.

No problem. Yeah, it's pretty handy.

This has been a well known issue forever.

Just disable shitty recovery in FF and use an add-on that isn't a piece of shit.
Disable sessions, dynamic bookmarks, RSS and any other shitty features that are constantly polling and running.

Recovery should ONLY ever be event-based, not fucking time based. Fuck off Mozilla, you god damn retards.

Or browse in private mode, that's what I do.

this is unacceptable

>We are testing other browsers. Currently in the middle of a Chrome Version 52.0.2743.116 m test. We have been able to see a pace of over 24GB/ day of writes on this machine
>literally twice as much as this problematic Firefox
kek you shills need to at least read up on the shit you're spreading FUD with

Chrome is just as bad.

The only upside with furryfaggot is you can disable the caching, recovery and any other shit.
You can't do shit about any of that in Chrome, besides maybe a few flags you can disable here and there.

Not sure if he has tested Chrome in Incognito yet.

it is unacceptable regardless of browser

DELETE THIS

session interval is related to a lots of problems, it's one of the first results on firefox performance. On older machines it's spotted random shutters every couple minutes.

>botnet in full protection mode

Having my SSD since over 2 years, not even 1tb written
Keep on making firefox worse than it is, Firefox users won't care. Fucking google cucks.

you can literally write at max speed for years before the ssd dies
honestly fuck off luddite

Where do you disable all that stuff?

As always with FF: the easy fix is not being poor.

This.
I don't even see why this is an issue.

Unless you faggots think you will be using the same SSD in 30 years.

not with samshit and its diefast™ technology.

>Update 1

You know that Samsung is the best SSD manufacturer there is, right?

that's not intel but enjoy your non-existatnt performance consistency/reliability. anyone with sense is unimpressed with samsung's write/read speeds that last a whole 3 seconds before it drops to something fucking terrible.

brave you cuck

No, INTEL is.

Chromeshit writes more to the fucking disk than FF ever did.

You can write multiple petabytes on your SSD before it dies, this kind of stuff is a non issue.

>unused RAM is wasted RAM

Did you read the article? Chrome does this too but you cant turn it off.

How can I check this with iotop?

Consumer drives have had petabytes of data written to them without failing. This is irrelevant.

>a serious design flaw is irrelevant because current hardware is unaffected
A flaw it's a flaw.

it's not a flaw it's a feature

Sorry Notch, my mistake

>minecraft
back to lebbit

Firefox - Destroyer of worlds

get on a high horse only when you've been here for more than a year.

There's literally no better way to implement this other than to do it this way. If you keep the writes in memory until closing then you defeat the purpose of writing the state in the first place which is to prevent data loss. Mozilla could change the frequency to every 60 seconds but that increases the risk of data loss.

>30GB of writes even when idle
explain yourself.

My development database wrote 35gigs today, I don't see what the problem is.

>projecting his newfaggtory
amazing, fuck off your crossposting cancer.

nigger, minecraft was a Cred Forums thing for a good while back in alpha. fuck off.

>30GB of writes even when idle
i thought this was about firefox not chrome

Videogames have never been "a Cred Forums thing"

katawa shoujo was a Cred Forums thing too, doesn't mean it's not complete and utter 9gag tier cancer now. nobody is convinced by your reading ed and kym.

you misspelled 'Cred Forums'

the Cred Forums is for graphics cards

oh god I miss those days

Install epiphany.

ks was never good

no you dont

Chrome BTFO again.

Are you a meme?

>Update 1: We are testing other browsers. Currently in the middle of a Chrome Version 52.0.2743.116 m test. We have been able to see a pace of over 24GB/ day of writes on this machine

>24GB

BOTNET
O
T
N
E
T

why has there been a big influx in anti-firefox posting in the last few weeks?

Cred Forums is full of shills

logitech is bad

It's actually been happening for the last year or two. A section of Cred Forums got really asshurt when Eich stepped down and they blamed the entire thing on Mozilla. Then these people started shitposting in every thread about firefox by blaming every little change they didn't like on SJWs

This isn't a lot you know. Modern SSDs are durable as fuck.

A 500GB Samsung 850 can sustain ~3,000,000GB of writes before it has problems or about 1TB of data per day for 10 years straight.

Your SSD will probably outlive you but you'll replace it with one that has a higher capacity before that (every 2-4 years most likely).

>not mentioning that chrome has the same problem
sasuga niwaka

I blame chrome and vivaldi shills, could of course also just be retards

It's been happening for a while now and kind of for a good reason given the shitty mistakes Mozilla has been making, but I have 'Firefox' keyword pinned in the catalog and only very recently have there been a lot of pinned anti Firefox threads at all hours of the day on Cred Forums, it seems.

Under value it says "15000." What do I set it to nigs?

That is 15 seconds. If you change it to 2 minutes that is 1/8 the amount of writes.

>10GB per day
that's not even noticeable.

one of my drives has a bug in the firmware (might actually just be the controller itself) that will constantly do wear leveling when the disk is in a certain C-State. so it will write 1GB every 5 minutes or so. i have over 25TB of NAND writes, but only around 500GB read/write of intentional read/writes. now THAT is something worth writing about.

this is on an intel SSD too (supposedly they're very reliable). they have done NOTHING to solve the problem in the year since this was reported.

there were a few games that were posted all over Cred Forums all the time a few years ago. off the top of my head i can only recall minecraft and that one particle sim game.

Is that Host Writes or NAND Writes?

I think I have basically the same thing.

see pic. intel 530 120gb


there's a thread on the intel support forum about this. someone created windows service that prevents the disk from idling long enough to go to that C-State. it's just a band-aid but it's better than your drive literally killing itself. just google "intel 530 nand write problem" and it's one of the first results.

meant to reply to

Yeah, same shit. I think it may have slowed down somewhat since I started using Chrome exclusively in incognito mode, but still.

It's almost like Intel want the drive to die sooner so that you have to buy a new one. :^)

kekium

just checked my box. this is actually a 535, not a 530. not sure what the differences are, but both are affected by this.

i'm surprised your drive reports 100% health despite 70TB of writes.

>year old 500GB SSD
>100%
>used firefox up until recently
k

chrome/google shills

How do I turn off session restore? I never use it and run private mode only.

This lists a .enable config, but it's not appearing on ff49, and the page seems drastically outdated anyway. Could I just set entries to 0?
kb.mozillazine.org/Browser.sessionstore.interval

>12GB total writes a day
>a lot
Really? This isn't 2007

Just hold down the 9 key for a while in the interval field.

The Intel Toolbox reports estimated 80% life remaining, but the health is 100% as well.

I actually wouldn't be entirely surprised if the value itself is actually a mistake. If you take the RAW values for total LBAs Written (or Host Writes) and Total LBAs Read for example, their HEX values don't transition directly into the displayed GB Reads/Writes when converted to decimal, but the NAND Writes value does.

1. The writes aren't remotely enough to be a meaningful issue for modern SSDs.
2. Chrome has the same problem.

Saged & Hidden ^_^

Found a more updated page that explains it better.

wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/session_restore

Seems like according to devs it writes about 1GB an hour, about 10TB a year. I guess it's a matter of how much wear your ssd can handle. You could probably just reduce the entry counts by a bit and increase the interval a little to shave off a bit.

>writing 10gb a day can kill your SSD
works fine on my mechanical hard drive :^)

no problemos here senjoritos

Technically yes but putting your profile on a hard disk causes firefox to run slow. Firefox likes running off of RAM. The most optimal place for the profile folder is literally a RAM disk but NVRAM(ie an SSD) helps as well.

>no visible NAND writes

B O T N E T

wuts that

Could work, for session store 100MB ramdisk would be enough. It's not big, it's just constantly writing to disk.

>retarded butthurt chrome peasants can't realize that it happens in chrome too and it's more severe than in firefox and they love the spyware that chrome has
>butthurt morons can't realize that it doesn't matter only if you have a modern SSD

Mozilla could probably make firefox copy the profile folder to RAM on startup and run it entirely from RAM and then have it periodically back up the data to disk every 5 minutes. That would at least make the browser very responsive but the writes to disk could be costly to performance if they're too big. The downside of that is if they're too frequent then it becomes stuttery.

Safari doesn't have this problem.

Poorfags BTFO yet again. You plebs will never learn.

>using SSDs
Ahaahahahahhahahhahahaha.

When will you learn that new technology is garbage?

>The downside of that is if they're too frequent then it becomes stuttery.

On the flipside if they're too frequent then it becomes stuttery.*

Well, doesn't that make moot the session restore on crash option, or is it possible to do a write to disk on crash from within FF itself? If not then that seems like the most sensible.

Firefox does have a crash log function but it wouldn't help much in case the entire OS crashes and there's a chance that a crashed browser might output invalid data so it's not exactly reliable for saving a profile in the event of a crash.

Kek'd.

Ultrawide monitor in portrait of course.

Tsk. Maybe they can just offer a ram option at the cost of session resume on crash, you still get history/tabs/windows/session store on quit which is really the most useful. Personally, I've never used the resume session from crash feature, and it can remain a "power user" option that has to be toggled via config, so everyday users won't accidentally lose the feature. Simple enough.

There is actually an active bug on the tracker about optimizing the session restore function

bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1304389

Looks like they're considering compressing the session store file to minimize the amount of data written and also fixing it so it doesn't write when there's nothing new to write.

>not buying a SanDisk
it's almost like you wanted it to fail.

sandisk is ridiculously robust, i got a 1gb old usb 1 that still works from more than 10 years ago

this is what happens when you hire political activists instead of real developers

>Firefox is literally destroying your SSD
So is literally every other program. Remind me why I should care?

>vulnerabilities
could you point me to them ? I can only find vulnerabilities that were already fixed.

Jokes on you, I got my user folder on my HDD, not my SSD.

I also want to know

>15000 is 15 seconds
so what, to set it to 30 minutes I'd put it to 1,800,000?

>the slimy suck dick meme

I bet you have an HRD 4k television and a HIV JIVE or whatever the fuck you homo

NAND writes are the things that matter. It is the actual amount of data that has been written onto the NAND which is different from Host writes in that it includes when data is moved around the NAND to optimize usage so you don't you don't pound a small section of NAND and kill it.
Host writes is data that has been sent to the drive to be written.

>Firefox wastes SSD writes
It takes about 1 minute to change browser.sessionstore.interval to a higher number of your choosing like the article says.

>Chrome generates a bunch of writes too
Well too fucking bad. Maybe the devs will take mercy on you in a few updates.

Seriously, this is why I continue to use Firefox instead of Chrome. Pretty much any behavior I don't like can be adjusted or turned off in about:config. Chrome only has a small number of things that can be adjusted. For everything else, too damn bad.

Like, they recently decided to take away backspace to to back, with no way to restore it. In Firefox this has been an option since very early on -- change it to your liking at browser.backspace_action.

>wear leveling count
>96

Maybe you should read the article

Not him, but I just set browser.sessionstore.interval to 86400000 (24 hours). I don't see any setting to completely disable it.

Not him, but security wise I'd go with Chrome/Chromium just based on it's sanboxing capabilities.

More reasons here: chromium.org/Home/chromium-security/brag-sheet

wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Firefox_on_RAM

1. Set Session Restore to 24 hours
2. Disable session restore, install extension that only updates a session file on TAB CHANGE, TAB LOAD or similar.

On tab change is better since you get any child sessions for that tab, instead of just the first page you went to.
But this will still have multiple writes per hour if you are a heavy user.

Preferably an extension to block certain sites from session, cookie and other writes would be required.
This way you could, say, only allow a site to change its local storage and session when YOU want it to.

Of course, if you live in a town or higher that isn't from the 10th century, you will have a reliable power grid to keep your computer on indefinitely.
You also have a UPS, right?

>all this effort because of FUD
It's amazing how many people in here don't understand SSD longevity

Qupzilla

Those browsers send everything you do to the Google servers and sell that information to the NSA and other companies.

I put a couple RAM heatsinks on my 950 Pro and now it literally never reaches temperatures which would kick in throttling

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I have a few TBs of writes on my SSD that I'll probably replace sooner or later for a faster one.
Some PBs remaining. Which mean I don't give a fuck.

I have a first generation Intel SSD which was my boot drive for six years until I upgraded a month ago and gave it to my Dad

it's still absolutely fine

SSDs dying fast from data writes is a meme

YOU THINK YOU DO, BUT YOU DON'T

so in the article it says teh default is 15s in the about config it shows as 15000 what should i set it to to be 30 mins?

milliseconds, dipshit.

so in the article it says teh default is 15ms in the about config it shows as 15000 what should i set it to to be 30 mins?

set it to kys

...

would 0 disable the feature altogether? I don't want a "session restore" in the first place

>2016
>being so mad you have to post anime at some text you dont like.

30 min = 1800 s = 1800000 ms

Thanks man

I did. Nothing like that happened.

See: zdnet.com/article/ssd-reliability-in-the-real-world-googles-experience/

>SSD age, not usage, affects reliability.

do you actually use your computer? i've written 750GB in the past month alone. current gen SSD's are much more robust, most of the old caveats no longer apply. you will have uprgraded to newer tech long before you reach failure levels

This happens with every browser.
Except Internet Explorer.

Man, why do you use this shit? "short ssd life" is a meme. They live not less than hdd.

U320 SCSI > ( you )


btfo

Does this trash regular HDDs?

No, the wear is offset by the rotational velocidensity.

Instead of increasing interval, is there any way to disable session restore COMPLETELY?

I haven't had a Firefox crash since I was using Minefield years ago.

>Not just moving the user folder and it's appdata to a hard drive
Every application you install will make temporary writes there and windows is too dumb by default to use the hard drive for meaningless writes.

>windows is too dumb by default to use the hard drive for meaningless writes.
What if you don't have a HDD…

>paying for things
kek, you shills never learn.

I assume you didn't pay anything for your computer, internet connection or electricity?

Chrome is okay. Chromium is a piece of trash.

Sauce?

My company gave me my x1 carbon along side my work thinkpad.

They are also housing me so that I don't have to commute. I also get £50 a day for food.

This is all on top of my salary.

Already read this a couple of days ago, but hadnt got around to changing any settings yet.

I assume that the default setting in my firefox shows up at 15000, its measured in miliseconds, so for 30minutes as the author suggests we would have to set it to 1800000?

>Update 1: We are testing other browsers. Currently in the middle of a Chrome Version 52.0.2743.116 m test. We have been able to see a pace of over 24GB/ day of writes on this machine

Sounds like you're still in the same boat though.

Yes 30min = 1800000ms

That only works if your case acts as a Faraday cage, everyone knows that

>people still give a shit about writes to SSD
There's a limit to how stupid you can be.

FURRYFAGS ON SUICIDE WATCH
SOMEONE TAKE THEIR SHOELANCES

second

15000 means 15000 milliseconds, you can probably get by with 1-5 minute intervals of your tabs.

>see this
>get worried because #crucial

mfw I realize that I installed firefox on my mechanical drive tho

>tfw your ramdisk is your temp cache for firefox
>writes all that shit on my ram

All good

No, really? Tell me more. I've never heard of the US government spying on it's citizens!

Nice clickbait.
Half you people never even read the article.
The other half are too busy freaking out because someone told you to.

kb.mozillazine.org/Session_Restore
For whoever wants to disable it. Bookmark it or something, because you will probably undo it later.

>We are testing other browsers. Currently in the middle of a Chrome Version 52.0.2743.116 m test. We have been able to see a pace of over 24GB/ day of writes on this machine

Chrome in 2016 LUL