How many Chrome tabs can you open with 2TB RAM?

[Gate95]

On 2/11/2020 at 1:54 PM, CPotter said:

 

I'm surprised Linus hasn't yet reviewed the 8TB Micron 2.5" SSD.

[williamcll]

19 hours ago, hishnash said:

Another example of someone attempting the chrome tab nightmare, apparently chrome was usable upto 4000 tabs. And the OS continued to be fully responsive even when chrome hard locks up.

At the end of the video he does however talk to a use case were having large amount of memory make sense not just in the server space but also (some) workstation workloads.
 

1.5TB for 4000 tabs and 2TB for 6000

Seems like it's scaling up and the OS doesn't is not the culprit here.

[hishnash]

1 hour ago, williamcll said:

1.5TB for 4000 tabs and 2TB for 6000

Seems like it's scaling up and the OS doesn't is not the culprit here.

the difference is that the OS was fully responsive even when goes well over that (chrome was not of course).

[merlins_ghost]

I have over 600 tabs open on my 32GB system with only 6-7% CPU loading.  My ram usage is 23GB.  The only time i notice Chrome having an issue is when there are a lot of animated ads so i actively avoid keeping pages with animated ads open, and I have some settings enabled in chrome to block some of ad sites.

I'm not a server person, but I am curious how many network connections are being used by that many tabs.  Is the Windows 10 version you are using designed for that many connections, ie is it a chrome bottleneck, or a network bottleneck?  I know the network was not maxing out based on the graph, but I am making an assumption that the network graph is referring to bandwidth not network connections.

 

[hishnash]

1 hour ago, merlins_ghost said:

 Is the Windows 10 version you are using designed for that many connections, ie is it a chrome bottleneck, or a network bottleneck?  I know the network was not maxing out based on the graph, but I am making an assumption that the network graph is referring to bandwidth not network connections.

 

Sort awser is no.

Windows 10 (non server version) has a limit of 64threads per process this limit also applies to the Kernal so there are at most 64 kernel threads... that is they the OS became very un-responsive with this many separate processes trying to get time on those kernal threads.

On linux or other posix style systems like macOS there is not such limit of the number of threads so the kernal will commonly create at least as many threads as there are processes on the system so each processes gets its own thread.

This helps a lot in not locking up the OS when the tasks you are doing are kernel heavy (like opening chrome tabs with all the networking and memory and disk access that will be going on). 

For many tasks this is not such a big deal (eg Rendering a video) since most of your CPU time will be within the application (so once the files has been requested from disk its all within the applications own memory) rather than between the application and the kernel. Loading lots of tabs will lead ot lots of jumping from tab to tab to give each tab some time to do its work (each such jump is handled by the kernal) and then all the networking requets and all the checking if a given item is already on disk...

[greenmax]

The answer is

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

who cares!

 

 

No one will be doing 100+ tabs/windows.

 

 

[Windows 7]

Hi