Develop Reference

Interning a string

When we intern a string, we are making sure that all uses of that string are referring to the same instance.
I would assume that the underlying string object is in the heap.
However, where is the referring variable stored in the memory?
Does it have the same behaviour as static - wherein the reference gets stored in permgen and makes the string instance available for gc only after the classloader(and application) exits?

Up to JDK 6, Intern'ed strings are stored in the memory pool in a place called the Permanent Generation, which is an area of the JVM that is reserved for non-user objects, like Classes, Methods and other internal JVM objects. The size of this area is limited, and is usually much smaller than the heap.
From JDK 7, interned strings are no longer allocated in the permanent generation of the Java heap, but are instead allocated in the main part of the Java heap (known as the young and old generations), along with the other objects created by the application. This change will result in more data residing in the main Java heap, and less data in the permanent generation, and thus may require heap sizes to be adjusted. Most applications will see only relatively small differences in heap usage due to this change, but larger applications that load many classes or make heavy use of the String.intern() method will see more significant differences.
A detailed explanation of this can be found on this answer.

When we intern a string, we are making sure that all uses of that string are referring to the same instance.
Not exactly. When you do this:
String s2 = s1.intern();
what you are doing is ensuring that s2 refers to a String in the string pool. This does not affect the value in s1, or any other String references or variables. If you want other copies of the string to be interned, you need to do that explicitly ... or assign interned string references to the respective variables.
I would assume that the underlying string object is in the heap.
That is correct. It might be in the "permgen" heap or the regular heap, depending on the version of Java you are using. But it is always "in the heap".
However, where is the referring variable stored in the memory?
The "referring variable" ... i.e. the one that holds the reference that you got from calling intern() ... is no different from any other variable. It can be
a local variable or parameter (held in a stack frame),
an instance field (held in a regular heap object),
a static field (held in a permgen heap object) ... or even
a jstring variable or similar in JNI code (held "somewhere else".)
In fact, a typical JVM uses a private hash table to hold the references to interned strings, and it uses the JVM's weak reference mechanism to ensure that interned strings can be garbage collected if nothing else is using them.
Does it have the same behaviour as static - wherein the reference gets stored in permgen and makes the string instance available for gc only after the classloader(and application) exits?
Typically no ... see above.
In most Java platforms, interned Strings can be garbage collected just like other Strings. If the interned Strings are stored in "permgen" space, it may take longer for the object to be garbage collected, because "permgen" is collected infrequently. However the lifetime of an interned String is not tied to the lifetime of a classloader, etc.

Java memory questions about 'new' keyword

What happens if you run the following code..
while (true) {
String x = new String("ABC");
}
in terms of memory?
Is String x allocated on the stack or on the heap? Will the program eventually crash because of a memory overflow, or will garbage collection prevent that? Does the new keyword always create the object on the heap? When is an object created on the stack?
Thanks!

Is String x allocated on the stack or on the heap?
x isn't a String. It is a reference to a String. The reference is a local variable, and so goes on the stack. The String is an object, and so goes on the heap.
Will the program eventually crash because of a memory overflow
Probably not.
or will garbage collection prevent that?
It should.
Does the new keyword always create the object on the heap?
Yes.
When is an object created on the stack?
Never ... unless the JVM decides it cannot escape the current scope and so decides to do so.

Using new, yes, puts objects on the heap. Objects that are no longer accessible by any thread can be garbage collected. Whether you run out of memory or not depends on the size of data your program uses, and if you are good at 'releasing' objects you dont need any more (think: memory leaks are bad).
In your example, you will be running the garbage collector like crazy, which I think is what you are intending to demonstrate.
Local variables go on the stack.

In theory, new creates on the Heap, and non-objects (i.e., ints, chars and so on) are created on the stack. The only exception, afaik, are strings, created on the stack as well. In practice, the JIT compiler of many modern JVMs will see that, in some cases, objects created with new can be created on the stack (for example, local objects that are not referenced outside of the current function).
The garbage collector will take care of the deallocation for you, that's its purpose, but of course you can run out of memory if you create and keep references on too many objects at the same time (try creating a list with a billion strings, for example).

String literal memory utilization

In java there is concept of string literal pool. If I am not creating any string in my code, this memory pool is waste for me. How can I use this memory area instead of keeping it for string literal pool.

There is no "string literal pool"; string literals are interned, but that means they are just normal objects on the heap. They presumably get referenced a lot and in this way save on memory, but fundamentally they are no different than any other object.
If no string literals exist in your program (and you don't ever call String.intern) then the JVM does not allocate heap memory for such. There is no "hidden" memory area involved, and you don't need to do anything to "get access to it".

I don't think it makes any sense. Anyway, theoretically, string pool is in permgen area of Java heap. This is the same memory where JVM stores classes. By default (at least for Oracle HotSpot JVM) it is 64 M. You can try to configure this area with two HotSpot JVM options: -XX:MaxPermSize and -XX:PermSize. The less permgen the more memory for objects.

How can I use this memory area instead of keeping it for string literal pool.
It is the area reserved by JVM and being increased (upto some threshold) as program runs. In short, you can't use it for some other purpose.

String Constant Pool memory sector and garbage collection

I read this question on the site How is the java memory pool divided? and i was wondering to which of these sectors does the "String Constant Pool" belongs?
And also does the String literals in the pool ever get GCed?
The intern() method returns the base link of the String literal from the pool.
If the pool does gets GCed then wouldn't it be counter-productive to the idea of the string pool? New String literals would again be created nullifying the GC.
(It is assuming that only a specific set of literals exist in the pool, they never go obsolete and sooner or later they will be needed again)

As far as I know String literals end up in the "Perm Gen" part of non-Heap JVM memory. Perm Gen space is only examined during Full GC runs (not Partials).
In early JVM's (and I confess I had to look this up because I wasn't sure), String literals in the String Pool never got GC'ed. In the newer JVM's, WeakReferences are used to reference the Strings in the pool, so interned Strings can actually get GC'ed, but only during Full Garbage collections.

Reading the JavaDoc for String.intern() doesn't give hints to the implementation, but according to this page, the interned strings are held by a weak reference. This means that if the GC detects that there are no references to the interned string except for the repository that holds interned strings then it is allowed to collect them. Of course this is transparent to external code so unless you are using weak references of your own you'll never know about the garbage collection.

String pooling
String pooling (sometimes also called as string canonicalisation) is a
process of replacing several String objects with equal value but
different identity with a single shared String object. You can achieve
this goal by keeping your own Map (with possibly soft
or weak references depending on your requirements) and using map
values as canonicalised values. Or you can use String.intern() method
which is provided to you by JDK.
At times of Java 6 using String.intern() was forbidden by many
standards due to a high possibility to get an OutOfMemoryException if
pooling went out of control. Oracle Java 7 implementation of string
pooling was changed considerably. You can look for details in
http://bugs.sun.com/view_bug.do?bug_id=6962931 and
http://bugs.sun.com/view_bug.do?bug_id=6962930.
String.intern() in Java 6
In those good old days all interned strings were stored in the PermGen
– the fixed size part of heap mainly used for storing loaded classes
and string pool. Besides explicitly interned strings, PermGen string
pool also contained all literal strings earlier used in your program
(the important word here is used – if a class or method was never
loaded/called, any constants defined in it will not be loaded).
The biggest issue with such string pool in Java 6 was its location –
the PermGen. PermGen has a fixed size and can not be expanded at
runtime. You can set it using -XX:MaxPermSize=96m option. As far as I
know, the default PermGen size varies between 32M and 96M depending on
the platform. You can increase its size, but its size will still be
fixed. Such limitation required very careful usage of String.intern –
you’d better not intern any uncontrolled user input using this method.
That’s why string pooling at times of Java 6 was mostly implemented in
the manually managed maps.
String.intern() in Java 7
Oracle engineers made an extremely important change to the string
pooling logic in Java 7 – the string pool was relocated to the heap.
It means that you are no longer limited by a separate fixed size
memory area. All strings are now located in the heap, as most of other
ordinary objects, which allows you to manage only the heap size while
tuning your application. Technically, this alone could be a sufficient
reason to reconsider using String.intern() in your Java 7 programs.
But there are other reasons.
String pool values are garbage collected
Yes, all strings in the JVM string pool are eligible for garbage
collection if there are no references to them from your program roots.
It applies to all discussed versions of Java. It means that if your
interned string went out of scope and there are no other references to
it – it will be garbage collected from the JVM string pool.
Being eligible for garbage collection and residing in the heap, a JVM
string pool seems to be a right place for all your strings, isn’t it?
In theory it is true – non-used strings will be garbage collected from
the pool, used strings will allow you to save memory in case then you
get an equal string from the input. Seems to be a perfect memory
saving strategy? Nearly so. You must know how the string pool is
implemented before making any decisions.
source.

String literals don't get created into the pool at runtime. I don't know for sure if they get GC'd or not, but I suspect that they do not for two reasons:
It would be immensely complex to detect in the general case when a literal will not be used anymore
There is likely a static code segment where it is stored for performance. The rest of the data is likely built around it, where the boundaries are also static

Strings, even though they are immutable, are still objects like any other in Java. Objects are created on the heap and Strings are no exception. So, Strings that are part of the "String Literal Pool" still live on the heap, but they have references to them from the String Literal Pool.
For more please refer this link
`http://www.javaranch.com/journal/200409/ScjpTipLine-StringsLiterally.html`
Edited Newly :
public class ImmutableStrings
{
public static void main(String[] args)
{
String one = "someString";
String two = new String("someString");
one = two = null;
}
}
Just before the main method ends, how many objects are available for garbage collection? 0? 1? 2?
The answer is 1. Unlike most objects, String literals always have a reference to them from the String Literal Pool. That means that they always have a reference to them and are, therefore, not eligible for garbage collection.
neither of our local variables, one or two, refer to our String object, there is still a reference to it from the String Literal Pool. Therefore, the object is not elgible for garbage collection.The object is always reachable through use of the intern() method

Where are static methods and static variables stored in Java?

For example:
class A {
static int i=0;
static int j;
static void method() {
// static k=0; can't use static for local variables only final is permitted
// static int L;
}
}
Where will these variables be stored in Java, in heap or in stack memory? How are they stored?

Static methods (in fact all methods) as well as static variables are stored in the PermGen section of the heap, since they are part of the reflection data (class related data, not instance related). As of Java 8 PermGen has been replaced by MetaSpace and as per JEP 122 it only holds meta-data while static fields are stored in the heap.
Note that this mostly applies to Oracle's Hotspot JVM and others that are based on it. However, not every JVM has PermGen or Metaspace like Eclipse OpenJ9.
Update for clarification:
Note that only the variables and their technical values (primitives or references) are stored in PermGen space.
If your static variable is a reference to an object that object itself is stored in the normal sections of the heap (young/old generation or survivor space). Those objects (unless they are internal objects like classes etc.) are not stored in PermGen space.
Example:
static int i = 1; //the value 1 is stored in the PermGen section
static Object o = new SomeObject(); //the reference(pointer/memory address) is stored in the PermGen section, the object itself is not.
A word on garbage collection:
Do not rely on finalize() as it's not guaranteed to run. It is totally up to the JVM to decide when to run the garbage collector and what to collect, even if an object is eligible for garbage collection.
Of course you can set a static variable to null and thus remove the reference to the object on the heap but that doesn't mean the garbage collector will collect it (even if there are no more references).
Additionally finalize() is run only once, so you have to make sure it doesn't throw exceptions or otherwise prevent the object to be collected. If you halt finalization through some exception, finalize() won't be invoked on the same object a second time.
A final note: how code, runtime data etc. are stored depends on the JVM which is used, i.e. HotSpot might do it differently than JRockit and this might even differ between versions of the same JVM. The above is based on HotSpot for Java 5 and 6 (those are basically the same) since at the time of answering I'd say that most people used those JVMs. Due to major changes in the memory model as of Java 8, the statements above might not be true for Java 8 HotSpot - and I didn't check the changes of Java 7 HotSpot, so I guess the above is still true for that version, but I'm not sure here.

Prior to Java 8:
The static variables were stored in the permgen space(also called the method area).
PermGen Space is also known as Method Area
PermGen Space used to store 3 things
Class level data (meta-data)
interned strings
static variables
From Java 8 onwards
The static variables are stored in the Heap itself.From Java 8 onwards the PermGen Space have been removed and new space named as MetaSpace is introduced which is not the part of Heap any more unlike the previous Permgen Space. Meta-Space is present on the native memory (memory provided by the OS to a particular Application for its own usage) and it now only stores the class meta-data.
The interned strings and static variables are moved into the heap itself.
For official information refer : JEP 122:Remove the Permanent Gen Space

Class variables(Static variables) are stored as part of the Class object associated with that class. This Class object can only be created by JVM and is stored in permanent generation.
Also some have answered that it is stored in non heap area which is called Method Area. Even this answer is not wrong. It is just a debatable topic whether Permgen Area is a part of heap or not. Obviously perceptions differ from person to person. In my opinion we provide heap space and permgen space differently in JVM arguments. So it is a good assumption to treat them differently.
Another way to see it
Memory pools are created by JVM memory managers during runtime. Memory pool may belong to either heap or non-heap memory.A run time constant pool is a per-class or per-interface run time representation of the constant_pool table in a class file. Each runtime constant pool is allocated from the Java virtual machine’s method area and Static Variables are stored in this Method Area.
Also this non-heap is nothing but perm gen area.Actually Method area is part of perm gen.(Reference)

This is a question with a simple answer and a long-winded answer.
The simple answer is the heap. Classes and all of the data applying to classes (not instance data) is stored in the Permanent Generation section of the heap.
The long answer is already on stack overflow:
There is a thorough description of memory and garbage collection in the JVM as well as an answer that talks more concisely about it.

It is stored in the heap referenced by the class definition. If you think about it, it has nothing to do with stack because there is no scope.

In addition to the Thomas's answer , static variable are stored in non heap area which is called Method Area.

As static variables are class level variables, they will store " permanent generation " of heap memory.
Please look into this for more details of JVM. Hoping this will be helpful

static variables are stored in the heap

When we create a static variable or method it is stored in the special area on heap: PermGen(Permanent Generation), where it lays down with all the data applying to classes(non-instance data). Starting from Java 8 the PermGen became - Metaspace. The difference is that Metaspace is auto-growing space, while PermGen has a fixed Max size, and this space is shared among all of the instances. Plus the Metaspace is a part of a Native Memory and not JVM Memory.
You can look into this for more details.

In real world or project we have requirement in advance and needs to create variable and methods inside the class , On the basis of requirement we needs to decide whether we needs to create
Local ( create n access within block or method constructor)
Static,
Instance Variable( every object has its own copy of it),
=>2. Static Keyword will be used with variable which will going to be same for particular class throughout for all objects,
e.g in selenium : we decalre webDriver as static => so we do not need to create webdriver again and again for every test case
Static Webdriver driver
(but parallel execution it will cause problem, but thats another case);
Real world scenario => If India is class, then flag, money would be same for every Indian, so we might take them as static.
Another example: utility method we always declare as static b'cos it will be used in different test cases.
Static stored in CMA( PreGen space)=PreGen (Fixed memory)changed to Metaspace after Java8 as now its growing dynamically

As of Java 8 , PermGen space is Obsolete. Static Methods,Primitives and Reference Variables are stored in Java MetaSpace. The actual objects reside in the JAVA heap. Since static methods never get out of reference they are never Garbage collected both from MetaSpace and the HEAP.