Slashdot Mirror
Google Sync Clobbers Chrome Browsers
If you use Chrome along with Google's Sync, you may have noticed something strange Monday: normally stable Chrome crashing. An article at Wired (excerpt below) explains why: "Late Monday, Google engineer Tim Steele confirmed what developers had been suspecting. The crashes were affecting Chrome users who were using another Google web service known as Sync, and that Sync and other Google services — presumably Gmail too — were clobbered Monday when Google misconfigured its load-balancing servers. ... Steele wrote in a developer discussion forum, a problem with Google's Sync servers kicked off an error on the browser, which made Chrome abruptly shut down on the desktop. 'It's due to a backend service that sync servers depend on becoming overwhelmed, and sync servers responding to that by telling all clients to throttle all data types,' Steele said. That 'throttling' messed up things in the browser, causing it to crash."
Sync was sunk
By a bristly punk.
Having less facial drag,
He'd've more clearly thunk.
Burma Shave
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
Fine as *one* backup location, fine for non-critical data and apps, fine for anything that won't be particularly missed if it goes offline for a while.
Shit for anything important.
What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
Software crashes due to complex online dependency, film at 11.
What you are seeing has nothing to do with sync and would happen even if you turned sync off. Chrome is just starting up as quickly as it can and only loading bookmarks when it can get to it.
Chrome doesn't have bookmark sync, it has a fairly deep browser state sync which happens to also include bookmarks.
Which, if all you want is bookmark sync, is a fairly great way to do it. That's not the focus of Chrome's browser sync, so its not surprising that Chrome's sync isn't optimized for that use case.
It seems there are some significant problems with Chrome on Windows that go beyond Windows' standard brain damage. The problems I've run into have been numerous enough that I've had to drop Chrome on my Windows machine and go to Firefox. Everyone is familiar with the usual disk pounding that Windows considers more important than servicing user events such as mouse clicks, etc. However, in the case of Chrome it seems very much worse. Firefox -- no problem. (Yes, all the usual suspects such as extensions, plugins, malware/virus scans etc. have been dealt with.)
Seastead this.
I can tell you this for certain first hand. I was wondering if there was something wrong with my phone itself, had it not been a busy day there's a serious chance I would have devoted some time finding a better ROM even though Mean ROM has been been pretty good so far, other than annoyances with the Android browser - which is why I put mobile Chrome on despite them being so similar.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
Firefox doesn't have only bookmark sync, it can sync settings, bookmarks, add-ons, passwords, history and tabs
The real advantage of Firefox sync is that is encrypted on the client side, so Mozilla is unable to read your data, not the same with Chrome
Why not request bandwidth and only proceed when it is granted.
This is still happening today.
"All the things one has forgotten scream for help in dreams". Elias Canetti
Here I thought it was crashing because I installed a plugin to make it more like Firefox.
I've noticed lately my Windows 7 x64 machine has been having issues with a fraction of my normal "Tab load" on Chrome, crashing or freezing pages, unable to show YouTube pages properly, etc... I believe this might be related to the Sync problem, since I use that.
These problems started a few weeks ago.
The best part about firefox sync is it always resulted in duplicates duplicates so even if you "lost" one set of bookmarks bookmarks then you'd have the other copy copy right there. That's why I stopped using firefox sync. xmarks on FF actually worked flawlessly, but FF wanted to put them out of business by shipping something built in that claimed to do the same thing for free but actually didn't work at all. Then I switched to chrome and never looked back. GOOG can F up quite a few more times until they reach the same level of annoyance FF sync reached for me.
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
The real advantage of Firefox sync is that is encrypted on the client side, so Mozilla is unable to read your data, not the same with Chrome
That's what I thought too, but apparently Chrome can do that too - it's just not on by default. Go to Settings > Advanced sync settings > Encrypt all synced data.
I like big butts and I can not lie You other brothers can't deny
Denied. They do have a high comedic value, though.
Cool but that landed you offtopic.
Try with: whatever + windows = linux or OSX
---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
Firefox is no longer the bloated piece of crap it once was while Chrome was new. It uses the least amount of ram of any browser. It no longer requires 4 gigs of ram and a quad core like version 4. Plugins no longer break with the latest release either between versions. Chrome has gotten buggy and much slower in comparison. In 2011 Chrome would the only browser besides old IE that could run on 5 year old hardware. Now firefox runs as fast as 2.0 on these systems.
http://saveie6.com/
for me in the exact way described, so maybe the problem's not fixed yet?
Obligatory cover by Ian McKellen facsimile.
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
No one is talking about slashdot being down last night.
rewriting history since 2109
Why limit yourself? I have been using X-Marks (originally Foxmarks) since 2006. Long before FireFox had sync or Google even thought of creating Chrome. It doesn't matter what system I log into or what browser I am using (well...between Chrome, FireFox, IE, and Safari) so I have a local copy on numerous machines and a copy in the cloud. You can even create bookmark profiles so those "mature" links don't show up on the work PC unless YOU want them to. If you add their premium service (US $12 annually) you can sync to your mobile device (iOS, Android, BlackBerry, Dolphin) as well as receive priority support.
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
One more good reason NOT to use the bookmarks sync function the browser supplies, and instead use a third party alternative.
I'm more surprised that every time I BOOTED Windows there was a Google Chrome crash message box presented. I can assure you that I was never given an option about having Chrome start with Windows and I most definitely did NOT added Chrome to any of my start up stuff. So in addition to showing that actual humans work at Google (well, at least a few) this also exposed the fact that installing Chrome installs something (that may claim to BE Chrome) that normally runs silently every time Windows is started. Maybe some of you knew about it, but it was news to everyone I've asked.
Also, I've been bit by Firefox's sync feature, too, when one of the machines had a problem and trashed all of my settings, bookmarks and add-ons the sync feature decided to propagate THAT to my other machines instead of using sync to fix the broken one. One would think that, if it was smart enough to detect that those things were corrupted, it should have used sync to get good copies, NOT to share the corruption. Heh... Maybe there's an ex or future politician writing code for Firefox, eh?
//try /* comment */ is for chumps.
//{
tabs.sync();
//}
//catch
//{
//printf("Oops, cloud sync failed. Terribly sorry, Captain. We'll fail gracefully and just make do without.");
//}
// James, I fucking told you not to use try-catch statements, they're too slow. The code works and a cloud failure is basically impossible (five nines, baby) so just chill, will you?
// P.S.
Check out my sci-fi book "Lacuna" at http://goo.gl/MVxX8
Chrome always encrypts your passwords on the client side - the other stuff isn't encrypted by default but can be encrypted as well if you choose to.
Great, I have old information of the first Chrome sync implementation. I will try it on my Chrome instances (my secondary browser)
OK: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_F76ySzk48
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
I like firefox though. They tell you you are SOL without the passkey. I have no idea how Chrome encrypts. It looks like it is linked to your google account. Google could easily be holding all the keys.
So for one day Internet Explorer was actually superior to Chrome?
Place nail here >+
$ tr "Firefox Opera" "Opera Midori" < parentcomment
That gives:
Itisrrmsithririiiris mrispgnpapcintioi blrmsiwpthiOpira Mi niWpnd wsithitig ibry ndiWpnd ws'istindiidibiipnidimigr.iThrioi blrmsiI'vriiunipnt ihivribrrninumri usirn ughithitiI'vrihidit idi oiOpira Mi nimyiWpnd wsimichpnriindig it idorii.iEvriy nripsiaimplpiiiwpthithriusuilidpskio undpngithitiWpnd wsic nspdrisim iripmo itintithinisrivpcpngiusriirvrntsisuchiisim usriclpcks,irtc.iH wrvri,ipnithricisri aiOpira Miptisrrmsivriyimuchiw isr.idoriii--in ioi blrm.i(Yrs,iillithriusuilisusorctsisuchiisirMtrnsp ns,iolugpns,imilwiir/vpiusiscinsirtc.ihivribrrnidriltiwpth.)
I'm not sure what this is intended to tell me, though.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
All right - stop what you're doin' 'cause I'm about to ruin
the image and the style that you're used to.
I look funny, but yo, I'm makin' money see -
so yo world, I hope you're ready for me!
Now gather round, I'm the new fool in town
and my sound's laid down by the Underground.
I drink up all the Hennessey ya got on ya shelf
so just let me introduce myself
My name is Humpty, pronounced with a Umpty.
Yo ladies, oh how I like to hump thee.
And all the rappers in the top ten--please allow me to bump thee.
I'm steppin' tall, y'all,
and just like Humpty Dumpty
you're gonna fall when the stereos pump me.
I like to rhyme,
I like my beats funky,
I'm spunky. I like my oatmeal lumpy.
I'm sick wit dis, straight gangsta mack
but sometimes I get ridiculous
I'll eat up all your crackers and your licorice
hey yo fat girl, c'mere--are ya ticklish?
Yeah, I called ya fat.
Look at me, I'm skinny
It never stopped me from gettin' busy
I'm a freak, I like the girls with the boom
I once got busy in a Burger King bathroom
I'm crazy, Allow me to amaze thee.
They say I'm ugly but it just don't faze me.
I'm still gettin' in the girls' pants
and I even got my own dance
The Humpty Dance is your chance to do the hump
Do the Humpty Hump, come on and do the Humpty Hump
Do the Humpty Hump, just watch me do the Humpty Hump
Do ya know what I'm doin', doin' the Humpty Hump
Do the Humpty Hump, do the Humpty Hump
Where is your God now, Frosty Piss?
Normally stable? What Chrome are they talking about because 25 is not stable?! They must not be talking about laying out pages wrong because you include that and it's right up there with Safari, lol. And forget super-complicated, code-heavy interactive pages. It will destroy them.
It sounds to me like you might have a corrupt profile? I've never had any of these issues with Chrome (on Linux) and I've been using it since the very first Chromium releases. Switched to the official Google version of Chrome a few years ago when it was released. It's pretty stable for me, but this bug did cause my profile to become corrupted and it would basically crash on startup. I just restored from my weekend system backup and everything was fine again.
You're not the only one with issues. Chrome crashes every 5-10 minutes on one of my laptops (a Windows 7 64-bit machine) which is down to a known compatibility problem with a DLL that's part of the Killer NIC drivers and some other software (bfllr.dll). This problem has been knocking around for a while but Google have done nothing to address it and Killer just try to blame it on browser extensions and ignore the problem.
And behold, a command prompt and he who sat upon it, his name was shutdown and -h 3:11 followed with him
The real advantage of Firefox sync is that is encrypted on the client side, so Mozilla is unable to read your data, not the same with Chrome
That's what I thought too, but apparently Chrome can do that too - it's just not on by default. Go to Settings > Advanced sync settings > Encrypt all synced data.
The problem is, though, that default is the reality for the vast majority of users.
This is why I use IE 6!! Rock solid.
I am... Humbled...
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
Ya, I mean why would their focus be on features that users actually want?
I think you just offered yourself to Cthulu for sexual favors.
I like firefox though. They tell you you are SOL without the passkey. I have no idea how Chrome encrypts. It looks like it is linked to your google account. Google could easily be holding all the keys.
Chrome uses a passphrase to encrypt sync data. By default it will use your Google account password, but you can change it to use any passphrase. If the Chrome devs are doing it right, they should be running the passphrase through PBKDF2 to derive an AES symmetric key. It's worth noting, though, that the Dashboard for "Chrome sync" shows counts for the number of synced items of each type. Assuming they're doing the crypto correctly, I see only two ways the Dashboard could know those numbers: (a) if Chome sends the counts in plaintext as part of the sync, or (b) if the items are individually encrypted (which is generally a bad idea due to known plaintext).
I do know from personal experience that you're SOL if you lose the Chrome sync passphrase (or if you simply want to change it). You have to click the "Stop sync and delete data from Google" link in the Dashboard, wait 5 or 10 minutes for the delete to finish, then set up sync again for all your Chrome instances. Oh, and Chrome sync still doesn't support OAuth login, so setting up sync is a pain if you have 2-factor auth set up on your account (as you should).
Disclaimer: I happen to work at Google, but I don't interact with Chrome except as a user. I'm using knowledge gleaned only from using Chrome sync with my personal account.
Range Voting: preference intensity matters
The reality is, that most users don't really care if someone sees their bookmarks. It's only a problem for privacy-obsessed nerds who project their mania onto other people.
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
And for anyone who has gotten burned by someone seeing the wrong bookmark/history entry. The difference with privacy-obsessed nerds is
1) They see the problem before it actually happens to them and
2) They have nobody to actually object to their viewing horse porn.
And that's cool - there's the option to turn it on for thems that wants it. Where it crosses the line is where they insist (like the GP) that having the option isn't enough, and that paranoia must be the default.
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
Thanks, I just found that. I read the page wrong. Great to know. Also the fact you pick the key is arguably nicer.
It has everything to do with Sync but I guess you didn't read the material. I use Chrome all the time and experienced no problems whatsoever. Why? I don't use Sync.
Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?