While reading some notes on performance tuning, I did notice a recommendations while setting memory size:
Java application should size both initial and maximum permanent generation size to the same value since growing or contracting the permanent generation space requires a full GC. Similar suggestion is given while setting the heap size, I.e. -Xmx=-Xms.
My question is, then why do we have -Xms setting at all?
Also,
Why GC gets triggered often if I''ve different value for -Xmx and -Xms, and not when I''ve same size for -Xmx and -Xms.
To add more to my second question, If I start with minimum heap size of 64M and Max 512 M, I believe full GC will not get triggered unless memory utilized by my app reaches 512M.
Similarly If I start with 512M for both -Xmx and -Xms, still JVM will trigger full GC when my app memory use reaches this limit. So why it's advised to set both max and min to the same value?
The setting flags were designed before the VM had generational, incremental collection. In that case complete collections were all there were. In more modern collectors full collections are rare. That's good because incremental collections are normally a few milliseconds, so the UI experience doesn't change. Complete collections of big arenas can take several seconds ore more. Changing the arena size - as the document says - is guarenteed to cause a full collection every time.
The guidance isn't perfect 100% of the time. There are few kinds of apps where allowing the arena to grow is reasonable.
-Xms=64m -Xmx=512m does not mean "start up with a heap between 64 and 512 MB". It instructs the JVM to request 64MB of committed memory and 512MB of reserved memory at startup. The heap will be 64MB to start with, and as it fills up, will expand into the space reserved for it. So, with Xms of 64MB you would see a full collection before the heap filled to 64MB.
If you start your application with a low value for Xms and turn on GC logging (-verbose:gc -Xloggc:FILENAME) the log file will show how the heap and generation sizes change as the application runs.
Minor collections may be more frequent with a lower Xms because the new generation will be smaller (assuming you are using proportional generation sizing rather than explicit) and so will fill more quickly.
One reason to have -Xms < -Xmx is to allow the JVM to not pre-allocate the whole Xmx upfront so that the difference is available (foe a while perhaps) to other applications. Gory details here: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/j-memusage/
Related
This is a screen shot of a JVM (win64, 6u17) running ActiveMQ, after every garbage collection the heap size is reducing. As the heap size reduces garbage collection gets more frequent and the heap reduces more quickly. Eventually the VM locks up as it's spending all it's time in GC.
-Xms is the default and -Xmx is 2048mb.
What is happening!!? How can I avoid this?
http://imagebin.org/92614
Shrinking heap http://imagebin.org/index.php?mode=image&id=92614
n.b originally posted on serverfault.com, moved to stackoverflow.com as requested
Google found me the following, from the IBM JVM FAQ (how's that for an NLA):
When does the Java heap shrink?
Heap shrinkage occurs when GC determines that there is a lot of free heap storage, and releasing some heap memory is beneficial for system performance. Heap shrinkage occurs after GC, but when all the threads are still suspended.
The Sun JVM does something similar. Below is an excerpt from an Oracle Technology Network article entitled Ergonomics in the 5.0 Java Virtual Machine.
The heap will grow or shrink to a size that will support the chosen throughput goal. Some oscillations in the size of the heap during initialization and during a change in the application's behavior can be expected.
...
It is typical that the size of the heap will oscillate as the garbage collector tries to satisfy competing goals. This is true even if the application has reached a steady state. The pressure to achieve a throughput goal (which may require a larger heap) competes with the goals for a maximum pause time and a minimum footprint (which both may require a small heap).
I suggest you have a look at the rest of that document; it may have more information relevant to your problem.
There is a JVM argument that controls when the heap is resized.
-XX:MaxHeapFreeRatio
The default value for this is 70. The free ratio is the amount of space not allocated on the heap over the total heap size. It the percentage of free space rises above the default of 70% the jvm will rreduce the size of the heap to allow the OS to use the memory.
If the heap is shrinking too often you can increase the value of -XX:MaxHeapFreeRatio. If it is set to 100 presumably it will never skrink.
Just a guess:
It looks like the system is pretty much idle. There might be some caching going on, and stuff drops out of the cache and gets gc'd. Or since it is a queuing system, maybe it has some messages, in the queue, which slowly get delivered and gc'd afterwards.
The increased frequence of gc-runs might be due to ever decreasing load on the system.
As to how to avoid it. Why do you want to avoid it? It seems like your CPU load is zero. So you are free to let the gc do whatever it wants
Most of the place on net , I get below info about heap parameters
-Xms<size> set initial Java heap size
-Xmx<size> set maximum Java heap size
Here is mine understanding/question when I mention -Xms 512M -Xmx 2048M parameters ,
-Xms :- My understanding is if my java process is actually needed only 200M , with mention of -Xms 512M , java process will still be assigned only 200M(actual memory required) instead of 500M . But if I already know that my application is going to take this 512M memory on start up then specifying less than will have impact on performance as anyways heap block need to resized which is costly operation.
Per discussion with my colleague, By default GC will trigger on 60% of Xms value. Is that correct ? If yes is it minor GC or full GC that is dependant on Xms value ?
Update on Xms:-
This seems to be true after reading JVM heap parameters but again is value 60% by default and is it minor or full GC that is dependent on Xms value?
-Xmx:- My understanding is with mention of -Xmx 2048M , java process is actually going to reserve 2048M memory for its use from OS itso that another process can not be given its share.If java process needed anyhow more than 2048M memory, then out of memory will be thrown.
Also i believe there is some relation of Full GC trigger on value of -Xmx. Because what I observed is when memory reaches near to 70% of Xmx, Full GC happens in jconsole. Is that correct?
Configuration :- I am using linux box(64 bit JVM 8). Default GC i.e Parallel GC
GC is not triggered based on just Xms or Xmx value.
Heap = New + Old generations
The heap size (which is initially set to Xms) is split into 2 generations - New (aka Young) and Old (aka Tenured). New generation is by default 1/3rd of the total heap size while Old generation is 2/3rd of the heap size. This can be adjusted by using JVM parameter called NewRatio. Its default value is 2.
Young Generation is further divided in Eden and 2 Survivor spaces. The default ratio of these 3 spaces are: 3/4th, 1/8th, 1/8th.
Side note: This is about Parallel GC collectors. For G1 - new GC algorithm divides the heap space differently.
Minor GC
All new objects are allocated in Eden space (except massive ones which are directly stored in Old generation). When Eden space becomes full Minor GC is triggered. Objects which survive multiple minor GCs are promoted to Old Generation (default is 15 cycles which can be changed using JVM parameter: MaxTenuringThreshold).
Major GC
Unlike concurrent collector, where Major GC is triggered based on used-space (by default 70%), parallel collectors calculate threshold based on 3 goals mentioned below.
Parallel Collector Goals
Max GC pause time - Maximum time spent in doing GC
Throughput - Percentage of time spent in GC vs Application. Default (1%)
Footprint - Maximum heap size (Xmx)
Thus by default, Parallel Collector tries to spend maximum 1% of total application running time in Garbage Collection.
More details here
Xms to Xmx
During startup JVM creates heap of size Xms but reserves the extra space (Xmx) to be able to grow later. That reserved space is called Virtual Space. Do note that it just reserves the space and does not commit.
2 parameters decide when heap size grows (or shrinks) between Xms and Xmx.
MinHeapFreeRatio (default: 40%): Once the free heap space dips below 40%, a Full GC is triggered, and the heap size grows by 20%. Thus, heap size can keep growing incrementally until it reaches Xmx.
MaxHeapFreeRatio (default: 70%): On the flip side, heap free space crosses 70%, then Heap size is reduced by 5% incrementally during each GC until it reaches Xms.
These parameters can be set during startup. Read more about it here and here.
PS: JVM GC is fascinating topic and I would recommend reading this excellent article to understand in-depth. All the JVM tuning parameters can be found here.
A JVM application runs on Oracle Hotspot JVM, it starts up with default JVM settings, but with 100MB of initial heap size and 1GB of maximum heap size.
Under which circumstances will JVM decide to grow the current heap size, instead of trying GC?
HotSpot JVM continuously monitors allocation rates and objects lifetimes. It tries to achieve two key factors:
let short-lived objects die in eden
promote long-lived object to heap on time to prevent unnecessarily copying between survivor spaces
In a nutshell you can describe it as the HotSpot have some configured threshold which indicates how much pecentage of total allocated heap have to by free after running garbage collector. For example if this threshold is configured for 70% and after running full GC heap usage will be 80%, then additional memory will be allocated to hit the threshold. Of course bigger heap means longer pauses while smaller heap means more frequent collections.
But you have to remember that JVM is very complex, and you can change this behaviour, for example by using flags:
AdaptiveSizePausePolicy, which will pick heap size to achieve shortest pauses
AdaptiveSizeThroughPutPolicy, which will pick heap size to achieve highest throughtput
GCTimeLimit and GCTimeRatio, which sets time spent in application execution
Number of object which occupies the Heap increases while garbage collection is not possible.
When objects not possible to collect as garbage since they are use by current process, JVM need to increase it's heap size towards it is maximum to allow to create new objects.
This is a screen shot of a JVM (win64, 6u17) running ActiveMQ, after every garbage collection the heap size is reducing. As the heap size reduces garbage collection gets more frequent and the heap reduces more quickly. Eventually the VM locks up as it's spending all it's time in GC.
-Xms is the default and -Xmx is 2048mb.
What is happening!!? How can I avoid this?
http://imagebin.org/92614
Shrinking heap http://imagebin.org/index.php?mode=image&id=92614
n.b originally posted on serverfault.com, moved to stackoverflow.com as requested
Google found me the following, from the IBM JVM FAQ (how's that for an NLA):
When does the Java heap shrink?
Heap shrinkage occurs when GC determines that there is a lot of free heap storage, and releasing some heap memory is beneficial for system performance. Heap shrinkage occurs after GC, but when all the threads are still suspended.
The Sun JVM does something similar. Below is an excerpt from an Oracle Technology Network article entitled Ergonomics in the 5.0 Java Virtual Machine.
The heap will grow or shrink to a size that will support the chosen throughput goal. Some oscillations in the size of the heap during initialization and during a change in the application's behavior can be expected.
...
It is typical that the size of the heap will oscillate as the garbage collector tries to satisfy competing goals. This is true even if the application has reached a steady state. The pressure to achieve a throughput goal (which may require a larger heap) competes with the goals for a maximum pause time and a minimum footprint (which both may require a small heap).
I suggest you have a look at the rest of that document; it may have more information relevant to your problem.
There is a JVM argument that controls when the heap is resized.
-XX:MaxHeapFreeRatio
The default value for this is 70. The free ratio is the amount of space not allocated on the heap over the total heap size. It the percentage of free space rises above the default of 70% the jvm will rreduce the size of the heap to allow the OS to use the memory.
If the heap is shrinking too often you can increase the value of -XX:MaxHeapFreeRatio. If it is set to 100 presumably it will never skrink.
Just a guess:
It looks like the system is pretty much idle. There might be some caching going on, and stuff drops out of the cache and gets gc'd. Or since it is a queuing system, maybe it has some messages, in the queue, which slowly get delivered and gc'd afterwards.
The increased frequence of gc-runs might be due to ever decreasing load on the system.
As to how to avoid it. Why do you want to avoid it? It seems like your CPU load is zero. So you are free to let the gc do whatever it wants
It is not possible to increase the maximum size of Java's heap after the VM has started. What are the technical reasons for this? Do the garbage collection algorithms depend on having a fixed amount of memory to work with? Or is it for security reasons, to prevent a Java application from DOS'ing other applications on the system by consuming all available memory?
In Sun's JVM, last I knew, the entire heap must be allocated in a contiguous address space. I imagine that for large heap values, it's pretty hard to add to your address space after startup while ensuring it stays contiguous. You probably need to get it at startup, or not at all. Thus, it is fixed.
Even if it isn't all used immediately, the address space for the entire heap is reserved at startup. If it cannot reserve a large enough contiguous block of address space for the value of -Xmx that you pass it, it will fail to start. This is why it's tough to allocate >1.4GB heaps on 32-bit Windows - because it's hard to find contiguous address space in that size or larger, since some DLLs like to load in certain places, fragmenting the address space. This isn't really an issue when you go 64-bit, since there is so much more address space.
This is almost certainly for performance reasons. I could not find a terrific link detailing this further, but here is a pretty good quote from Peter Kessler (full link - be sure to read the comments) that I found when searching. I believe he works on the JVM at Sun.
The reason we need a contiguous memory
region for the heap is that we have a
bunch of side data structures that are
indexed by (scaled) offsets from the
start of the heap. For example, we
track object reference updates with a
"card mark array" that has one byte
for each 512 bytes of heap. When we
store a reference in the heap we have
to mark the corresponding byte in the
card mark array. We right shift the
destination address of the store and
use that to index the card mark array.
Fun addressing arithmetic games you
can't do in Java that you get to (have
to :-) play in C++.
This was in 2004 - I'm not sure what's changed since then, but I am pretty sure it still holds. If you use a tool like Process Explorer, you can see that the virtual size (add the virtual size and private size memory columns) of the Java application includes the total heap size (plus other required space, no doubt) from the point of startup, even though the memory 'used' by the process will be no where near that until the heap starts to fill up...
Historically there has been a reason for this limitiation, which was not to allow Applets in the browser to eat up all of the users memory. The Microsoft VM which never had such a limitiation actually allowed to do this which could lead to some sort of Denial of Service attack against the users computer. It was only a year ago that Sun introduced in the 1.6.0 Update 10 VM a way to let applets specify how much memory they want (limited to a certain fixed share of the physical memory) instead of always limiting them to 64MB even on computers that have 8GB or more available.
Now since the JVM has evolved it should have been possible to get rid of this limitation when the VM is not running inside a browser, but Sun obviously never considered it such a high priority issue even though there have been numerous bug reports been filed to finally allow the heap to grow.
I think the short, snarky, answer is because Sun hasn't found it worth the time and cost to develop.
The most compelling use case for such a feature is on the desktop, IMO, and Java has always been a disaster on the desktop when it comes to the mechanics of launching the JVM. I suspect that those who think the most about those issues tend to focus on the server side and view any other details best left to native wrappers. It is an unfortunate decision, but it should just be one of the decision points when deciding on the right platform for an application.
My gut feel is that it has to do with memory management with respect to the other applications running on the operating system.
If you set the maximum heap size to, for example, the amount of RAM on the box you effectively let the VM decide how much memory it requires (up to this limit). The problem with this is that the VM could effectively cripple the machine it is running on because it will take over all the memory on the box before it decides that it needs to garbage collect.
When you specify max heap size, what you're saying to the VM is, you are allowed to use this amount of memory before you need to start garbage collecting. You cannot have more because if you take more then the other applications running on the box will slow down and you will start swapping to the disk if you use more than this.
Also be aware that they are two values with respect to memory, that is "current heap size" and "max heap size". The current heap size is how much memory the heap size is currently using and, if it requires more it can resize the heap but it cannot resize the heap above the value of maximum heap size.
From IBM's performance tuning tips (so may not be directly applicable to Sun's VMs)
The Java heap parameters influence the behavior of garbage collection. Increasing the heap size supports more object creation. Because a large heap takes longer to fill, the application runs longer before a garbage collection occurs. However, a larger heap also takes longer to compact and causes garbage collection to take longer.
The JVM has thresholds it uses to manage the JVM's storage. When the thresholds are reached, the garbage collector gets invoked to free up unused storage. Therefore, garbage collection can cause significant degradation of Java performance. Before changing the initial and maximum heap sizes, you should consider the following information:
In the majority of cases you should set the maximum JVM heap size to value higher than the initial JVM heap size. This allows for the JVM to operate efficiently during normal, steady state periods within the confines of the initial heap but also to operate effectively during periods of high transaction volume by expanding the heap up to the maximum JVM heap size. In some rare cases where absolute optimal performance is required you might want to specify the same value for both the initial and maximum heap size. This will eliminate some overhead that occurs when the JVM needs to expand or contract the size of the JVM heap. Make sure the region is large enough to hold the specified JVM heap.
Beware of making the Initial Heap Size too large. While a large heap size initially improves performance by delaying garbage collection, a large heap size ultimately affects response time when garbage collection eventually kicks in because the collection process takes more time.
So, I guess the reason that you can't change the value at runtime is because it may not help: either you have enough space in your heap or you don't. Once you run out, a GC cycle will be triggered. If that doesn't free up the space, you're stuffed anyway. You'd need to catch the OutOfMemoryException, increase the heap size, and then retry you calculation, hoping that this time you have enough memory.
In general the VM won't use the maximum heap size unless you need it, so if you think you might need to expand the memory at runtime, you could just specify a large maximum heap size.
I admit that's all a bit unsatisfying, and seems a bit lazy, since I can imagine a reasonable garbage collection strategy which would increase the heap size when GC fails to free enough space. Whether my imagination translates to a high performance GC implementation is another matter though ;)