Ofcourse we all want our browser be as fast as possible. Therefor you can implemend the speedsettings you can find on the KM website and I think they give a great improvement. For myself I also switched off the disk-cache, keep-alive and referrer header's so these are my 'speedsettings' now:

/* ENABLE IMPROVED PIPELINING */
user_pref("network.http.pipelining", true);
user_pref("network.http.proxy.pipelining", true);
user_pref("network.http.pipelining.firstrequest", true);
user_pref("network.http.pipelining.maxrequests", 100);

/* INCREASE MULTI-THREADED DOWNLOAD PERFORMANCE */
user_pref("network.http.max-connections", 60);
user_pref("network.http.max-connections-per-server", 32);
user_pref("network.http.max-persistent-connections-per-proxy", 16);
user_pref("network.http.max-persistent-connections-per-server", 8);

/* REMOVE PAINT DELAY WHEN LOADING */
user_pref("nglayout.initialpaint.delay", 0); /* Default is 250 */

/* TURN OFF KEEP ALIVE */
user_pref("network.http.keep-alive", false);
user_pref("network.http.proxy.keep-alive", false);

/* DISABLE SENDING REFERRER'S HEADER */
user_pref("network.http.sendRefererHeader", 0);

/* TURN OFF DISK CACHE */
user_pref("browser.cache.disk.capacity", 0);
user_pref("browser.cache.memory.capacity", 102400);


I am not using:

/* TIMER BASED REFLOW MANAGEMENT */
user_pref("content.notify.ontimer", true);
user_pref("content.notify.interval", 100);
user_pref("content.notify.backoffcount", 200);

because sometimes these settings give me some problems (the menue of http://www.hayabusaclubholland.nl ), or the website is much slower with then without these settings (lists of products in http://www.marktplaats.nl , etc...)


What I would like to know is if there are some other settings which could give some speed-improvement which I have not mentioned above.
I think it would be nice to have a complete list and add these to the speedsettings on the KM website, ofcourse with some comments about what it is doing to your browser.

Jan.

I've always had the "network.http.keep-alive" ones on. Can't remember where I read that this improves speed improvement. But what the heck---I'm going to give it a try this time for the heck of it. I'm also going to try the one about turning off the disk cache and going with the memory cache ONLY. I've read a lot about that here and people swearing by it. So I'll give that a try as well.

Of course all of this is rather moot for me because I was bumped up this week from a t1 line to a t2 line. But running with just the memory cache, I'm curious if this might solve some other little problems I've been having.

Thanks Jan.

Mazzel!

Eyes-Only
"L'Peau-Rouge"

I've found that page loading is slower with the disk cache disabled - which is logical, if you think about it.

Tell me why Brian. I have a computer with 1Gb of RAM and am loading each program in a seperate part of the RAM. My RAM-cache setting for KM is 102400 = 102 Megabyte. When I am looking what KM is using of it it is about 20Mb, so plenty of RAM for my use.
I have learned that RAM is faster then Disk-cache so why would KM pageloading be slower with disk cache disabled??
I am not saying your story is not true, but logical I can't see why it would be right...

Jan

I tend to visit the same websites over and over again; and I exit from K-Meleon at the end of each browsing session. Under these conditions, if data for those sites are already stored in the disk cache, you would expect them to load faster than if they had to be called fresh each time. And that's what seems to happen on my system - with the disk cache disabled, those websites load much more slowly. I guess the move of disabling the disk cache would produce faster speeds if I kept K-M running even when I'm not using it.

Hi Brian,

Okay, now I understand what you mean. You are right that stored pictures etc... will be called from diskcache and therefor will speed-up browsing like you are doing.
I prefer a clean start, no stored cache-data etc... Therefor I have disabled the history and diskcache, and because RAM-cache is faster in this case :-)))

I have my browser open during the day so data will be stored in RAM-cache. Sometimes a refresh is so fast I didn't even notice it :-))

But, about my first question, are there people with some other settings which could influence the speed positive??

Thanks,
Jan

Oh my..............great stuff............those settings are excellent!!

Thanks.............Mike

Xp Pro

Oh my..............great stuff............those settings are excellent!!

Thanks.............Mike

Xp Pro

I had expected a little more discussion about possible settings... :-(((
Are these settings the only ones affecting speed or does everyone have his own settings, is satisfied and don't want to share them with other people?!?!
Okay, we try it again ;-))) Someone who is using other settings, not mentioned above or maybe with other parameters because after test these seems to be better then my settings???

Jan.

Not sure if there's all that many more that you can do Jan. I think all of mine come from either the Wiki, the Mozilla pages (in which case they've been posted in the development section I believe?), or put in from what I've seen from other members but I've removed them because I didn't think they made all that much of a difference.

It's rather hard for me to tell anyway because I'm on a t2. LOL! I could run with the defaults and it seems to run just as fast.

However: One setting I did NOT like was the one where I disabled the disk cache and ran on RAM cache alone, setting it at 102,500kb (or whatever). I DID notice a difference with that, especially on start up as it had to load the entire page and it would take a few seconds each time whereas before it would compare what was in the cache and just load. Seeing that I don't have to update my page very much this is why it loads faster. But I thought, "If it's this way with my page what about with others?" So I changed it back to what I had it.

Anyway, I think most of the speed tweaks have been discussed. Sorry to disappoint Jan though I'd love to have someone show me otherwise as I'm always loving to tweak KM as well.

À la prochaine,

Eyes-Only
"L'Peau-Rouge"

Hi Eyes-Only,

Brian and you are right about the speed with using diskcache.
I have changed my settings to see the difference in the following settings

user_pref("browser.cache.disk.capacity", 10240);
user_pref("browser.cache.memory.capacity", 51200);

The pages ARE loading faster the first time, the strange thing is that I have the idea that also later, when I load a website/ page a second time it SEEMS to be a little faster. Hmm, strange, isn't it?!?

But, I will keep it this way although I don't like the idea of all that stored cache-info...

Jan.

Why not just empty the disk cache from time to time? Or reduce its maximum size? I've found that the cached data only adds up to about 50Mb after several weeks of intense usage. Of course this may be because, as I mentioned, I tend to visit the same websites over and over again and few others.

Hi,

I have tried the speedsettings proposed by Fast Sjonny. I hadn't any improvement.
Au contraire. They made the browser speed even worse. I think that the standard values are optimal for ISDN.

Salut
Norbert

Hmm... Since I always like to tweak Jan I'm going to give them a try. Like I say, I don't expect to see any changes because of my connection but who knows? Anyway, I've added a little icon to my toolbar (in my BeOS theme it's the trashcan) and it's hooked to "ComClear". I click that when existing the browser. ComClear comes up, close the browser, select the KM pathway, press "Clean", and cookies and cache are cleaned! Neat, huh? I never could get the batch files to work right for some silly reason. Alain's did for awhile and then started working about 95% of the time. Weird, huh?

Anyway, as usual I ramble. I'll try these settings Jan and see what happens. Thanks!

À la prochaine,

Eyes-Only
"L'Peau-Rouge"

Hi Eyes-Only,

The speedsettings I mentioned above are for 95 percent the speedsettings everyone can find on the KM speedsettingpage http://kmeleon.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php?id=PageSpeed .
These are proven speedsettings I believe, but maybe for some connections they make things worser as Norbert is telling, I don't know. I could see a great improvement with my ADSL 1024/256 connection and also now with 2048/384 I see an improvement.

The only parts I have added are:

/* DISABLE SENDING REFERRER'S HEADER */
user_pref("network.http.sendRefererHeader", 0);

And now then:

/* DISK CACHE AND MEMORY CACHE SETTINGS */
user_pref("browser.cache.disk.capacity", 10240);
user_pref("browser.cache.memory.capacity", 20480);

But, I would be glad to hear if they bring you anything.

About this 'comclear' , this sounds great BUT will remove the benefits of the diskcache ;-))) When you clear the diskcache I think startup without diskcache is the same as with. For cookies I delete my cookies.txt about ones a week, just because there is a lot of trash in it. Normaly I always visit the same websites and therefor I would like to keep these cookies.
But, I think some people would be interested in your solution. It is simple (no delete of files in explorer anymore) and it is easy to implement.

Jan.

Eyes-Only said:

"It's rather hard for me to tell anyway because I'm on a t2. LOL! I could run with the defaults and it seems to run just as fast."

I've tried the "faster page loading" tweaks in the wiki and noticed it actually slowing KM down with my DSL connection. It's tends to "hang" on images on some sites. Default settings seems to work best for me! May be a different story with dial-up.

I have a DSL connection and I noticed a marked improvement in speed after putting the tweaks into effect (excluding the cache tweaks).

Hi Brian. I have Mozilla 1.6 with pipelining enabled and it wouldn't "hang" on the sites that was giving KM trouble. I'm not quite sure what the problem is. Again, it seem to be fine on default (plenty fast!).

That's strange because they are using the same engine...
About Moz, do you notice a big difference there in pipelining enabled or disabled??
Could it be that some other settings as max. connections etc... do influence the result in KM?
May be an idea to compare the speedsettings used in Moz and KM...

Greeetzzzzz,
Jan

I've also noticed that using
user_pref("network.http.keep-alive", false);
user_pref("network.http.proxy.keep-alive", false);

makes a difference.

Hi Marc,

I have to approve that. I use the standard-settings because for ISDN (dial-up)
they seem to be the best with the following exception:

user_pref("network.http.keep-alive", false);
user_pref("network.http.proxy.keep-alive", false);

In this case "false" seems to be better than "true".

Salut
Norbert

Here are some other prefs to play with:

user_pref("network.ftp.idleConnectionTimeout", 60);
user_pref("network.http.keep-alive.timeout", 10);
user_pref("network.http.request.max-start-delay", 5);
user_pref("network.http.connect.timeout", 30);
user_pref("network.dnsCacheExpiration", 360);
user_pref("network.dnsCacheEntries", 100);
user_pref("network.dir.format", 3);
user_pref("network.prefetch-next", false);
user_pref("network.protocol-handler.external.mms", true);

See this page for info about them / which parameters are accepted.


Shelumi`El
Jordan

S.D.G

I noticed Mozilla is a "tiny" bit faster with pipelining enabled. Again, it doesn't prove troublesome having it on, so why not! KM's better on default, but it's still a bit faster than Moz with pipelining on my connection. I have the max. total connectins and connections to server stock on both Mozilla and KM.

The bigger the memory cache, the more data it can cache... but that's not always an advantage, as it means search operations within the cache data will get slower and slower and slower. Same true for disk cache of course. Setting memory cache larger than 4 MB or setting disk cache larger than 20 MB will rather slow down performance than speed up anything.

This is from here http://www.mozilla.org/quality/networking/docs/netprefs.html
browser.cache.disk.parent_directory
path to Cache folder in profile (default)
Cache Folder: [text box]
Note: the contents of disk and mem cache are different (a very large mem cache is not the same as pointing disk cache to memory mapped disk space (RAM disk)

How different? So, if I'm running disk cache from a ramdrive, mem cache is not needed?

And BTW, as I told you, becouse of memory leak, mem setting are useless.

browser.cache.memory.capacity any integer (in bytes)
Replaced by automatic sizing in Mozilla 1.4b (bug 105344).
This value overrides the application. (before, 4096K = default)

The memory chache setting is fine to use and still works. The only change is that there is no "default" value set for it, and if the user doesn't set one, the value is determined automatically based on the amount of memory available to the program.

" ------- Additional Comment #58 From gordon 2003-06-03 16:25 PST [reply] -------

Ben, the browser.cache.memory.capacity pref isn't gone, just the default value
in prefs.js. If the pref is set, we respect it." (Cite, emphasis added).


Shelumi`El
Jordan

S.D.G

thats fine.
Still, whats the diff between mem and disk cache?
I dont want them together. Mem fragmentation, you know.

What in Gods name are "Mem fragmentation"

He..he..

In what way could possibly memory be fragmented...???

Anyways; I have pretty fast line (2.5mbit down and 0.768 up) and I have max conns : 128 and per server: 48 cuz i saw those higher values at another site b4 and it worx like a charm.

I also after reading here turned ON disk-cache and I thought b4 that only mem-cache would be faster but the 2 together is making it much faster..

And I installed AR-Ram Disk which is only a little driver to emulate a local harddrive in memory and did place my disk-cache there and it seems to speed it up even more...

Cause of that I think that the 2 of them worx best when working together cuz othervise it wouldnt be any difference to place the cache on an emulated harddrive than placing it on the real one...

Or..?

I also have these 2 values:

user_pref("network.image.imageBehavior", 0);

user_pref("general.smoothScroll", false)

First one is said to turn off "Auto Image Resizing" and the second one turns off "smooth crolling" a la IE which I reckon is a feature that slows down things just to look nice...

See ya !

Oops...

Correction:

I meant the caches worx best together othervise there wouldnt be any difference in placing it on an emulated harddrive than just use memory-cache...

>What in Gods name are "Mem fragmentation"

My Lord, theres google, you know.
well, this will do.
http://www.rsinc.com/services/techtip.asp?ttid=3346