From 53eafbf832f0bcbf1e09eef337c22a7c2a4342d0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Raymond Hill Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 12:57:20 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] =?UTF-8?q?Updated=20=C2=B5Block=20vs.=20ABP:=20efficiency?= =?UTF-8?q?=20compared=20(markdown)?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit --- µBlock-vs.-ABP:-efficiency-compared.md | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) diff --git a/µBlock-vs.-ABP:-efficiency-compared.md b/µBlock-vs.-ABP:-efficiency-compared.md index cfd13bb..e1cb295 100644 --- a/µBlock-vs.-ABP:-efficiency-compared.md +++ b/µBlock-vs.-ABP:-efficiency-compared.md @@ -21,6 +21,8 @@ Both extensions had _EasyList_, _EasyPrivacy_, _Peter Lowe's Ad Server_ list, an ### Added CPU overhead to each net request +Last updated on: 30 January 2015. + ABP and µBlock need to evaluate the URL of each net request against their dictionary of filters, and eventually tell the waiting browser whether the request should be cancelled or not. Since the browser is waiting for an answer, this is a time critical part and determining whether the request should be allowed or not must be done as fast as possible. Below are the average time it takes for each extension to handle a net request in their respective `chrome.webRequest.onBeforeRequest` handler, using the same [benchmark](https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Reference-benchmark).