Hi, Sorry for the tardy reply. We currently have no plan to support that model, but it will be something we can keep in mind as we progress. I would like us to concentrate on getting the simple two-process case (SharedSecondaryProcessModel) working well, before we get more adventurous. -Sam On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 6:11 AM, Andras Becsi <abecsi@inf.u-szeged.hu> wrote:
Hi!
Just to get things clear:
SecondaryProcessModel:
Web processes: {W} {W} {W} {W} {W} | | | | | UI processes: {<t> <t> <t>} {<t> <t>}
This should be the model Chrome uses, and the model which saves some memory and is parallel should be the
SharedSecondaryProcessModel:
Web processes: {W} {W} / | \ / \ UI processes: {<t> <t> <t>} {<t> <t>}
where <t> means the tabs (or pages) and {<t>} represents a process with one tab.
Balazs, the model you suggested, would look like:
SharedSecondaryServerProcessModel (maybe):
Web proces (server): {W} /// \\ UI processes: {<t> <t> <t>} {<t> <t>}
Right? This means there would be only one WebProcess, which would work as a server for UI client processes which connect to it. I see the benefits of this in an embedded environment where widgets share one common WebProcess and thus this model would use less memory, for example if the WebProcess is used by multiple widgets. I see that this model is not really parallel, but saves memory.
Is there a future plan to support this model too?
BR: Andras
On 09/01/2010 01:09 PM, Balazs Kelemen wrote:
(Sorry for flooding the list but I need to repeat my reply to put it in the right thread.)
Seems like I misunderstood the concept. I assumed that the shared process model means that there could be multiply UI process instances that uses the same web process, virtually when the second MiniBrowser is launched it connects to the existing web process. By taking a deeper look into the WebContext and WebProcessProxy classes, I have realized that the shared process model is about using one web process for multiply views (what is cool) and not for multiply processes (what would be more cool from my point of view :) ). What do you think about my idea? Primarily on embedded devices it would be great to use the web engine as a server process because it could save a lot of memory. I think the current design is not too far for supporting that. Mainly we should find a correct way of connecting the new UI process to the existing web process, and the Connection should be per page instead of per process (or we should rework the WebProcess to not be a singleton?). Please provide some feedback on this because it is important for our project to know which way should we go on with WebKit2. Thank you!
Balazs Kelemen
On 08/30/2010 08:22 PM, Sam Weinig wrote:
Hi Balazs,
Does it not work currently? If not, can you please file bugs on what is not working. We plan on making the shared process model the default model for the API, but it will probably have the caveat that it will not support InjectedBundles.
-Sam
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 6:08 AM, Balazs Kelemen <kb@inf.u-szeged.hu <mailto:kb@inf.u-szeged.hu>> wrote:
Hi all!
I am wondering about do you plan for the mac and win to support the shared web process model? Actually, I have played around with that for Qt. I have a working, proof of concept implementation. The visited links and the back-forward list features are broken, but apart from that the browsers are working with the shared web process. I had to rework common parts of the code for achieving that, and I would like to contribute it in small parts. I think if we want to support that model in the future than we should start to implement it as soon as possible to assure that our design fits the needs of that.
Cheers! Balazs Kelemen _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org <mailto:webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org>
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev