I know how to set the Java heap size in Tomcat and Eclipse. My question is why? Was there an arbitrary limit set on the initial heap back when Java was first introduced so the VM wouldn't grow over a certain size? It seems with most machines today with large memory space available this isn't something we should have to deal with.
Thanks,
Tom
Even now, the heap doesn't grow without limit.
When the oldest generation is full, should you expand it or just GC? Or should you only expand it if a GC doesn't free any memory?
.NET takes the approach you'd like: you can't tell it to only use a certain amount of heap. Sometimes it feels like that's a better idea, but other times it's nice to be able to have two processes on the same machine and know that neither of them will be able to hog the whole of the memory...
I glanced by this the other day, but I'm not sure if this is what you want: -XX:+AggressiveHeap. According to Sun:
This option instructs the JVM to push
memory use to the limit: the overall
heap is more than 3850MB, the
allocation area of each thread is
256K, the memory management policy
defers collection as long as possible,
and (beginning with J2SE 1.3.1_02)
some GC activity is done in parallel.
Because this option sets heap size, do
not use the -Xms or -Xmx options in
conjunction with -XX:+AggressiveHeap.
Doing so will cause the options to
override each other's settings for
heap size.
I wasn't sure if this really meant what I thought it meant, though - that you could just let the JVM gobble up heap space until it is satisfied. However, it doesn't sound like it's a good option to use for most situations.
I would think that it's good to be able to provide a limit so that if you have a memory issue it doesn't gobble up all the system memory leaving you with only a reboot option.
Java is a cross-platform system. Some systems (like Unix and derviates) have a ulimit command which allows you to limit how much memory a process can use. Others don't. Plus Java is sometimes run embedded, for example in a web browser. You don't want a broken applet to bring down your desktop (well, that was at least the idea but applets never really caught on but that's another story). Essentially, this option is one of the key cornerstones for sandboxing.
So the VM developers needed a portable solution: They added an option to the VM which would allow anyone (user, admin, web browser) to control how much RAM a VM could allocate tops. The needs of the various uses of Java are just too diverse to have one size fits all.
This becomes even more important today when you look at mobile devices. You desktop has 2-8GB RAM but your mobile has probably much less. And for these things, you really don't want one bad app to bring down the device because there might not even be a user who could check.
Related
The JVM -Xmx argument lets one set the max heap size for the JVM to some value. But, is there a way to make that value dynamic? In other words, I want to tell the JVM "look, if you need it, just keep taking RAM from the system until the system is out."
Two-part reason for asking:
First, the app in question can use a really wide range of ram depending on what the user is doing, so the conceptual min and max values are pretty far apart. Second, it would seem that the JVM reserves the max heap space from virtual memory at boot time. This particular app is run on a pretty wide variety of hardware, so picking a "one-size-fits-all" max heap space is hard since it has to be low enough to run on low-end hardware, but we'd really like to be able to take advantage of really beefy machines if they're available.
But, is there a way to make that value dynamic?
Literally, no. The max heap size is set at JVM launch time and cannot be increased.
In practice, you could just set the max heap size to as large as your platform will allow, and let the JVM grow the heap as it needs. There is an obvious risk in doing this; i.e. that your application will use all of the memory and cause the user's machine to grind to a halt. But that risk is implicit in your question.
EDIT
It is worth noting that there are various -XX... GC tuning options that allow you to tweak the way that the JVM expands the heap (up to the maximum).
Another possibility is to split your application into 2 parts. The first part of the application does all of the preparation necessary to determine the "size" of the problem. Then it works out an appropriate max heap size, and launches the memory hungry second part of the application in a new JVM.
This only works if the application can sensibly be partitioned as above.
This only works if it is possible to compute the problem size. In some cases, computing the problem size is tantamount to computing the result.
It is not clear that you will get better overall performance than if you just let the heap grow up to a maximum size.
It doesn't. It could, and it probably should:
-Xmx90% // 90% of physical memory
However, a default implicit, 100%, is proabbly not a good idea.
A program written in a non-GC language manages its memory very diligently, it will prune any garbage as soon as possible. It makes sense to allow it to get any memory it requests, assuming it's responsible for prompt garbage disposal.
A GC language is different. It collects garbage only when necessary. As long as there's room, it doesn't care about garbage lingering around. If it could get all the memory it would like to have, it would get all the memory in the computer.
So a GC programmer doesn't have to worry about disposing every piece of garbage any more, but he still have to have a general idea of the tolerable garbage/live object ratio, and instruct GC with -Xmx.
Basically, you can't adapt to various users' hardware using pure Java: that's when a little bit of shell/batch scripting can come in handy.
I do just that on OS X and Linux: I've got a little bash shell script that takes care of finding the correct JVM parameters depending on the hardware the application is run on and then calling the JVM.
Note that if you're providing a desktop Java application, then you may want to use something like izpack to provide your users an installer:
http://izpack.org
I don't know at all if Java Web Start can be used to provide different JVM parameters depending on the user's config (probably not, and JWS really s*cks big time anyway if you plan to provide a professional looking desktop app).
There is a JDK Enhancement Proposal (JEP) 8204088
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8204088
http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/8204088
"Dynamic Max Memory Limit"
that suggests to introduce CurrentMaxHeapSize:
To dynamically limit how large the committed memory (i.e. the heap
size) can grow, a new dynamically user-defined variable is introduced:
CurrentMaxHeapSize. This variable (defined in bytes) limits how large
the heap can be expanded. It can be set at launch time and changed at
runtime. Regardless of when it is defined, it must always have a value
equal or below to MaxHeapSize (Xmx - the launch time option that
limits how large the heap can grow). Unlike MaxHeapSize,
CurrentMaxHeapSize, can be dynamically changed at runtime.
The expected usage is to setup the JVM with a very conservative Xmx
value (which is shown to have a very small impact on memory footprint)
and then control how large the heap is using the CurrentMaxHeapSize
dynamic limit.
While there are no signs of this feature actively being worked at,
it's relatively new JEP (from 2018), so I would still keep this in mind.
And company Jelastic (jelastic.com) has made a working prototype
of JEP 8204088 for G1 garbage collector:
See description at http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/2018-May/022077.html
and list of patches for OpenJDK
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tschatzl/jelastic/cmx/
My Linux server need to be able to handle 30+ eclipse instances for developers. I did a quick test of running 10 eclipse instances. The Java process associated with each eclipse initially around 200MB RSS memory, increased up to around 550MB, when more projects are loaded.
But Java process doesn't seem to release memory, after closing/deleting all projects within eclipse instances. I still see it uses over 550MB RSS.
How can I change Eclipse or Java settings so that memory foot print got reduced when developers closed down projects or being idle for a while?
Thanks
You may want to experiment with these (and other) JVM tuning options to make the JVM less reluctant to return memory to the OS:
-XX:MaxHeapFreeRatio Maximum percentage of heap free after GC to avoid shrinking. Default is 70.
-XX:MinHeapFreeRatio Minimum percentage of heap free after GC to avoid expansion. Default is 40.
However, I suspect that you won't see the eclipse process shrink to anywhere near its initial size, since eclipse is a huge, complex application that probably lazy-loads (but does not unload, once used) a lot of classes and associated data structures.
I've never seen Java release memory.
I don't think you will get any value out of trying to get it to release memory with Eclipse, I've watched that little memory counter for YEARS and never once see the allocated memory drop.
You might try one of these.
After each session, exit the JVM and restart.
Set your -Xmx lower.
Separate your instances into categories with high -Xmx and low -Xmx and let the user determine which one he wants.
As a side-thought, if it really mattered to you, you MIGHT be able to run multiple eclipse instances under one VM. It would probably be WAY too much work (man-weeks to man-years), but if you could get it right you could reduce overhead by like 150-200mb/instance. The disadvantage would be that a VM crash (Pretty rare these days) would kill everyone.
Testing this theory would be a matter of calling eclipse's main from within an existing JVM and trying to get it to display somewhere useful. The rest of the man-year is spent trying to figure out where they used evil static variables or singletons and changing them to something else.
Switch the Java to use the G1 garbage collector with the HeapFreeRatio parameters. Use these options in eclipse.ini:
-XX:+UnlockExperimentalVMOptions
-XX:+UseG1GC
-XX:MinHeapFreeRatio=5
-XX:MaxHeapFreeRatio=25
Now when Eclipse eats up more than 1 GB of RAM for a complicated operation and switched back to 300 MB after Garbage Collection the memory will be released back to the operating system.
I would suggest checking on garbage collection, setting right options or even forcing GC periodically might increase time till eclipse memory usage grows high.
Following link might be useful http://www.eclipsezone.com/eclipse/forums/t93757.html
I have been developing a small Java utility that uses two frameworks: Encog and Jetty to provide neural network functionality for a website.
The code is 'finished' in that it does everything it needs to do, but I have some problems with memory usage. When running on my development machine the memory usage seems to fluctuate between about 4MB and 13MB when the application is doing things (training neural networks) and at most it uses about 18MB. This is very good usage and I think it is due to the fact that I call System.GC() fairly regularly. I do this because the processing time doesn't matter for me, but the memory usage does.
So it all works fine on my machine, but as soon as I put it online on our server (shared unix hosting with memory limits) it uses about 19MB to start with and rises to hundreds of MB of memory usage when doing things. These are the same things that I have been doing in testing. The only way, I believe, to reduce the memory usage, is to quit the application and restart it.
The only difference that I can tell is the Java Virtual Machine that it is being run on. I do not know about this and I have tried to find the reason why it is acting this way, but a lot of the documentation assumes a great knowledge of Java and Virtual Machines. Could someone please help m with some reasons why this may be happening and perhaps some things to try to stop it.
I have looked at using GCJ to compile the application, but I don't know if this is something I should be putting a lot of time in to and whether it will actually help.
Thanks for the help!
UPDATE: Developing on Mac OS 10.6.3 and server is on a unix OS but I don't know what. (Server is from WebFaction)
I think it is due to the fact that I
call System.GC() fairly regularly
You should not do that, it's almost never useful.
A garbage collector works most efficiently when it has lots of memory to play with, so it will tend to use a large part of what it can get. I think all you need to do is to set the max heap size to something like 32MB with an -Xmx32m command line parameter - the default depends on whether the JVM believes it's running on a "server class" system, in which case it assumes that you want the application to use as much memory as it can in order to give better throughput.
BTW, if you're running on a 64 bit JVM on the server, it will legitimately need more memory (usually about 30%) than on a 32bit JVM due to larger references.
Two points you might consider:
Calls of System.gc can be disabled by a commandline parameter (-XX:-DisableExplicitGC), I think the behaviour also depends on the gc algorithm the vm uses. Normally invoking the gc should be left to the jvm
As long as there is enough memory available for the jvm I don't see anything wrong in using this memory to increase application and gc performance. As Michael Borgwardt said you can restrict the amount of memory the vm uses at the command line.
Also you may want to look at what mode the JVM has been started when you deploy it online. My guess its a server VM.
Take a look at the differences between the two right here on stackoverflow. Also, see what garbage collector is actually running on the actual deployment. See if you can tweek the GC behaviour, or change the GC algorithm.See the -X options if its a Sun JVM.
Basically the JVM takes the amount of memory it is allowed to as needed, in order to make the "new" operation as fast as possible (this is a science in itself).
So if you have a lot of objects being used, and then discarded, you will slowly and surely fill up the available memory. Then you can ask for garbage collection, but it is just a hint, and the JVM may choose not to listen.
So, you need another mechanism to keep memory usage down. The typical approach is to limit the amount of memory with -Xoptions, but be careful since the JVM you use on your pc may be very different from the one you deploy on, and the memory need may therefore be different.
Is there a deliberate requirement for low memory usage? If not, then just let it run and see how the JVM behaves. Use jvisualvm to attach and monitor.
Perhaps the server uses more memory because there is a higher load on your app and so more threads are in use? Jetty will use a number of threads to spread out the load if there are a lot of requests. Its worth a look at the thread count on the server versus on your test machine.
I was testing the amount of memory java uses on Linux. When just staring up an application that does absolutely NOTHING it already reports that 11 MB is in use. When doing the same on a Windows machine about 6 MB is in use. These were measured with the top command and the windows task manager. The VM on linux I use is the 1.6_0_11 one, and the hotspot VM is Server 11.2. Starting the application using -client did not influence anything.
Why does java take this much memory? How can I reduce this?
EDIT: I measure memory using the windows task manager and in Linux I open the terminal and type top.
Also, I am only interested in how to reduce this or if I even CAN reduce this. I'll decide for myself whether a couple of megs is a lot or not. It's just that the difference of 5 MB between windows and Linux is strange, and I want to know if I am able to do this on Linux too.
If you think 11MB is "too much" memory... you'd better avoid using Java entirely. Seriously, the JVM needs to do quite a lot of stuff (bytecode verifier, GC, loading all the essential classes), and in an age where average desktop machines have 4GB of RAM, keeping the base JVM overhead (and memory use in generay) very low is simply not a design priority.
If you need your app to run on an embedded system (pretty much the only case where 11 MB might legitimately be considered "too much"), then there are special JVMs designed for such sytems that use less RAM - but at the cost of lacking many of the features and/or performance of mainstream JVMs.
You can control the heap size otherwise default values will be used, java -X gives you an explanation of the meaning of these switches
i.g.
set JAVA_OPTS="-Xms6m -Xmx6m"
java ${JAVA_OPTS} MyClass
The question you might really be asking is, "Does windows task manager and Linux top report memory in the same way?" I'm sure there are others that can answer this question better than I, but I suspect that you may not be doing an apples to apples comparison.
Try using the jconsole application on each respective machine to do a more granular inspection. You'll find jconsole on your sdk under the bin directory.
There is also a very extensive discussion of java memory management at http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/linux/library/j-nativememory-linux/
The short answer is that how memory is being allocated is a more complex answer than just looking at a single figure at the top of a user simplifed system utility.
Both Top and TaskManager will report how much memory has been allocated to a process, not how much the process is actually using, so I would say it's not an apples to apples comparison. Regardless, in the age of Gigs of memory what's a couple megs here or there on startup?
Linux and Windows are radically different operating systems and use RAM very differently. Windows kind of allocates as you go, and Linux caches more at once, and prepares for the future, so that the next operations are smooth.
This explanation is not quite right, but it's close enough for you.
I have heard several people claiming that you can not scale the JVM heap size up. I've heard claims of the practical limit being 4 gigabytes (I heard an IBM consultant say that), 10 gigabytes, 32 gigabytes, and so on... I simply can not believe any of those numbers and have been wondering about the issue now for a while.
So, I have three part question I would hope someone with experience could answer:
Given the following case how would you tune the heap and GC settings?
Would there be noticeable hickups (pauses of JVM etc) that would be noticed by the end users?
Should this really still work? I think it should.
The case:
64 bit platform
64 cores
64 gigabytes of memory
The application server is client facing (ie. Jboss/tomcat web application server) - complete pauses of JVM would probably be noticed by end users
Sun JVM, probably 1.5
To prove I am not asking you guys to do my homework this is what I came up with:
-XX:+UseConcMarkSweepGC -XX:+AggressiveOpts -XX:+UnlockDiagnosticVMOptions -XX:-EliminateZeroing -Xmn768m -Xmx55000m
CMS should reduce the amount of pauses, although it comes with overhead. The other settings for CMS seem to default automatically to the number of CPUs so they seem sane to me. The rest that I added are extras that might do good or bad generally for performance, and they should probably be tested.
Definitely.
I think it's going to be difficult for anybody to give you anything more than general advice, without having further knowledge of your application.
What I would suggest is that you use VisualGC (or the VisualGC plugin for VisualVM) to actually look at what the garbage collection is doing when your app is running. Once you have a greater understanding of how the GC is working alongside your application, it'll be far easier to tune it.
#1. Given the following case how would you tune the heap and GC settings?
First, having 64 gigabytes of memory doesn't imply that you have to use them all for one JVM. Actually, it rather means you can run many of them. Then, it is impossible to answer your question without any access to your machine and application to measure and analyse things (knowing what your application is doing isn't enough). And no, I'm not asking to get access to your environment :)
#2. Would there be noticeable hickups (pauses of JVM etc) that would be noticed by the end users?
The goal of tuning is to find a good compromise between frequency and duration of (major) GCs. With a ~55g heap, GC won't be frequent but will take noticeable time, for sure (the bigger the heap, the longer the major GC). Using a Parallel or Concurrent garbage collector will help on multiprocessor systems but won't entirely solve this issue. Why do you need ~55g (this is mega ultra huge for a webapp IMO), that's my question. I'd rather run many clustered JVMs to handle load if required (at some point, the database will become the bottleneck anyway with a data oriented application).
#3. Should this really still work? I think it should.
Hmm... not sure I get the question. What is "this"? Instantiating a JVM with a big heap? Yes, it should. Is it equivalent to running several JVMs? No, certainly not.
PS: 4G is the maximum theoretical heap limit for the 32-bit JVM running on a 64-bit operating system (see Why can't I get a larger heap with the 32-bit JVM?)
PPS: On 64-bit VMs, you have 64 bits of addressability to work with resulting in a maximum Java heap size limited only by the amount of physical memory and swap space your system provides. (see How large a heap can I create using a 64-bit VM?)
Obviously heap size is not unlimited and the larger is the heap size, the more your JVM will eventually spend on GC. Though I think it is possible to set heap size quite high on 64-bit JVM, I still think it's not really practical. The advice here is better to have several JVMs running with the same parameters i.e. cluster of JBoss/Tomcat nodes running on the same physical machine and you will get better throughput.
EDIT: Also your GC behavior depends on the taxonomy of your heap. If you have a lot of short-living objects and each request to the server creates a lot of those, then your GC will collect a lot of garbage very often and thus on large heap size this will result in longer pauses. If you have very many long-living objects (e.g. caching most of your data in memory) and the amount of short-living objects is not that big, then having bigger heap size is OK.
As Chris Rice already wrote, I wouldn't expect any obvious problems with the GC for heap sizes up to 32-64GB, although there may of course be some point of your application logic, which can cause problems.
Not directly related to GC, but I would still recommend you to perform a realistic load test on your production system. I used to work on a project, where we had a similar setup (relatively large, clustered JBoss/Tomcat setup to serve a public web application) and without exaggeration, JBoss is not behaving very well under high load or with a high number of concurrent calls if you are using EJBs. JBoss is spending a lot of time in synchronized blocks when accessing and managing the EJB instance pools and if you opt for a cluster, it will even wait for intra-cluster network communication within these synchronized blocks. Be especially aware of poorly performing state replication, if you are using SFSBs.
Only to add some more switches I would use by default: -Xms55g can help to reduce the rampup time because it frees Java from the need to check if it can fall back to the initial size and allows also better internal initial sizing of memory areas.
Additionally we made good experiences with NewSize to give you a large young size to get rid of short term garbage: -XX:NewSize=1g Additionally most webapps create a lot of short time garbage that will never survive the request processing. You can even make that bigger. With Xms55g, the VM reserves a large chunk already. Maybe downsizing can help.
-Xincgc helps to clean the young generation incrementally and return the cpu often to the user threads.
-XX:CMSInitiatingOccupancyFraction=70 If you really fill all that memory, try to start CMS garbage collection earlier.
-XX:+CMSIncrementalMode puts the CMS into incremental mode to return the cpu to the user threads more often.
Attach to the process with jstat -gc -h 10 <pid> 1s and watch the GC working.
Will you really fill up the memory? I assume that 64cpus for request processing might even be able to work with less memory. What do you store in there?
Depending on your GC pause analysis, you may wish to implement Incremental mode whereby the long pause may be broken out over a period of time.
I have found memory architecture plays a part in large memory sizes. Applications in general don't perform as well if they use more than one memory bank. The JVM appears to suffer as well, esp the GC which has to sweep the whole memory.
If you have an application which doesn't fit into one memory bank, your application has to pull in memory which is not local to a processor and use memory local to another processor.
On linux you can run numactl --hardware to see the layout of processors and memory banks.