I am using the version 3.1.0 on 10.10.5 OSX.
Am I the only "lucky" user getting such a poor memory performance?
As an added bonus, there are no more animated emojis in my peripheral vision that can be mistaken for an update / alert.
I'm on Linux, but I presume wc works fine on Mac. A bit of a shame that the qt-based client seems abandoned - but it's open source and python so maybe it'll pick up some steam for those that want something a bit less console only, but still not Web app crappy.
https://github.com/wee-slack/wee-slack
https://github.com/weechat/weechat
https://github.com/weechat/qweechat
I imagine that both for the console client and the qt one it should be possible to map some of the more common emojis to Unicode (eg :heart:).
- Slack: 103.8 MB
- Slack Helper: 61 MB
- Slack Helper: 459.1 MB
- Slack Helper: 549.6 MB
- Slack Helper: 264.9 MB
Total = 1.4384 GB for only 3 Slack channels on macOS High Sierra
Pretty absurd.
I admit I don't really pay attention but I've never noticed Slack using crazy amounts of memory.
What am I doing right?
Part of 6 organizations.
Running High Sierra.
I would like to think this means there will be a bit of a change going forward.
I recommend:
* Disabling emoji support, especially animated emojis>
* Disabling auto-expanding of images (gifs are egregious)
* Use compact display
* Limit number of channels/groups you're in if possible, surely you don't need all those channels.
Doing this curbed my resource usage quite a lot. I don't miss emoji's all that much.
It, and every JS/Desktop hybrid has so much promise, but my Lord, as a proficient JavaScript junkie that has a deep abiding love for the language, it's not performant.
I just can't use either Atom or VS Code for day to day work.
PS, Sublime, please support some form of JS plugins, even if that means limiting the API for JS plugins.
Slack, which is idling in the background in just one organization, consumes 22 MB more than QtCreator :P OTOH, there's also a full-blown IRC client Konversation, connected to 2 servers and 42 channels total, consuming 80.6 MB.
No, that's very common. For most people Slack's usefulness outweighs it's poor memory footprint.
You need to put it in context. Is system ram under pressure? Poor memory performance is measured by swap i/o or bandwidth, not usage.
If you have 16gb of ram and little else using the ram then there is nothing to worry about. If you have 4gb of ram then a support ticket is probably your best course of action rather than whining to random forums.
To answer your question, runtimes will lazy garbage collect because you might want the data again. Decompressed images and frame buffers lead to faster under interface interaction. You're not using a terminal app, you're using an app that can render any font or image in complex ways to an image buffer, for rendering at 60fps with smooth scroll. Are you also on a retina display?
Sounds like Slack doesn't have any type of performance testing as part of their release cycles.
