On 12/01/2011 04:52 PM, g wrote:
> On 12/02/2011 12:19 AM, Yasha Karant wrote:
>>    From the top command :
>>
>> 8587 ykarant   20   0  794m 449m  30m R 81.8  5.6 561:50.12
>> plugin-containe
>>
>> with the 81.8 being %CPU composite usage on a modern quad-core X86-64
>> machine.
>>
>> ps axw reveals:
>>
>>    8587 ?        Sl   562:06 /usr/lib/firefox/plugin-container
>> /usr/lib/flash-plugin/libflashplayer.so -greomni
>> /usr/lib/firefox/omni.jar 13704 true plugin
>>
>> Does anyone understand why plugin-container for libflashplayer.so is
>> such a CPU usage hog?
>
>
> see this link for operation of plugin-container;
>
>    http://kb.mozillazine.org/Plugin-container_and_out-of-process_plugins
>
> it is possible that if you have a lot of plugins, they are using up
> memory, or just one is hogging memory.
>
> if you have multi java plugins, disable them one by one to see if hogging
> and you could delete old ones.
>
> also, if you have plugins that you seldom use, disable them.
>
> another thing you can do is disable all add-ons to see how much memory
> plugin-container is using.
>
> remember, you must restart firefox for changes to apply.
>

I apologize for being dense, but I do not understand your explanation. 
ps axw should display all instances of any process, as should top for 
those instances consuming significant resources.  Thus, my machine 
appears to have had only one instance of the flash plugin.  Or, do 
plugins have a means to avoid showing up as processes because of some 
internal threading mechanism or the like? Does top not accurately report 
the resource usage of plugin-container, flash, etc.?

To any of those who are familiar with the source code and/or internal 
operation of the flash plugin, why is it such a resource hog?  Is there 
any (perhaps lacking public documentation) parameter(s) that can be set 
to change this?  E.g., have flash update an image at longer intervals 
for lower quality, but less resource use.

Yasha Karant