為了改善您的使用體驗，本網站正在進行維護，部分功能暫時無法使用。若本站的文件無法解決您的問題，想要向社群發問的話，請到 Twitter 上的 @FirefoxSupport 或 Reddit 上的 /r/firefox 發問，我們的社群成員將很快會回覆您的疑問。

Avatar for Username

搜尋 Mozilla 技術支援網站

防止技術支援詐騙。我們絕對不會要求您撥打電話或發送簡訊，或是提供個人資訊。請用「回報濫用」功能回報可疑的行為。

了解更多

此討論串已被封存。 如果您有需要幫助，請新增一個新問題

In Firefox 55 (2017) does it still make sense to move the cache to RAM?

  • 1 回覆
  • 3 有這個問題
  • 7 次檢視
  • 最近回覆由 user633449

PopStarWannabe
PopStarWannabe
more options

I refer to the classic case where I have an SSD and don't want to "consume" it by watching endless videos on YouTube (and/or other sites) that are being buffered to the disk. Or does the buffering of such videos occur in RAM by default in Firefox?

I also want to speed up Firefox at the maximum.

What are the downsides of having the entire cache in RAM and, if none, why isn't the default instalation with no cache at all on the disk (browser.cache.disk.enable = false) ?

What is the best configuration of Firefox (regarding cache) on a laptop with the an SSD and 4 GB of RAM?

Thanks in advance.

I refer to the classic case where I have an SSD and don't want to "consume" it by watching endless videos on YouTube (and/or other sites) that are being buffered to the disk. Or does the buffering of such videos occur in RAM by default in Firefox? I also want to speed up Firefox at the maximum. What are the downsides of having the entire cache in RAM and, if none, why isn't the default instalation with no cache at all on the disk (browser.cache.disk.enable = false) ? What is the best configuration of Firefox (regarding cache) on a laptop with the an SSD and 4 GB of RAM? Thanks in advance.

所有回覆 (1)

user633449
user633449
more options

I don't think it ever makes sense to have your cache live in RAM. If you have a SSD, you will never hit the max number of read-writes in your lifetime, so you don't have to worry about that. As for performance, no, it won't significantly change performance (and could actually hinder it).