mozilla

Compare Revisions

Performance best practices in extensions

Change Revisions

Revision 31695:

Revision 31695 by Sheppy on

Revision 31696:

Revision 31696 by DaveG on

Title:
Performance best practices in extensions
Performance best practices in extensions
Slug:
Extensions/Performance_best_practices_in_extensions
Extensions/Performance_best_practices_in_extensions
Tags:
NeedsTechnicalReview, Extensions, Add-ons, NeedsContent, NeedsExample, Performance
NeedsTechnicalReview, Extensions, Add-ons, NeedsContent, NeedsExample, Performance
Content:

Revision 31695
Revision 31696
t100      Reading data from compressed archives costs time. The highet100      Reading data from compressed archives costs time. The highe
>r the compression level of the archive, the higher also the perfo>r the compression level of the archive, the higher also the perfo
>rmance cost of reading the data from it. So any JAR files in your>rmance cost of reading the data from it. So any JAR files in your
> extension should always be packed with compression level 0 (no c> extension should always be packed with compression level 0 (no c
>ompression) for better performance. This will not increase the do>ompression) for better performance. It may seem counter-intuitive
>wnload size because the XPI file that contains the JAR file is st>, but doing this will increase the JAR file size and actually <em
>ill compressed.>>decrease</em> the XPI file size as it allows for compression bet
 >ween files inside the JAR to be done when compressing the XPI (es
 >sentially a poor-man's <a class=" external" href="http://en.wikip
 >edia.org/wiki/Solid_archive" title="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
 >Solid_archive">solid archive</a> effect).

Back to History