Load balancing, I imagine. :-) On 5/22/06, Snake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have to wonder what one does if they have a CF server that requires more > than 1.8gb RAM for the JVM, say u have some big heavy site sthat do a lot > of caching of big files/queries? > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dante Orlando [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 22 May 2006 19:41 > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: MaxHeapSize + MaxPermSize > > Thanks for all of your replies. First of all, I was really just looking for > the "whys" rather than any particular recommendation on what values to set > these params to. As far as the permanent generation being part of the heap, > I have been able to verify that the permenent generation (i.e. -XX:PermSize > and -XX:MaxPermSize) is *separate* from the object heap (i.e. -Xms and > -Xmx). See the following diagram from Sun: > > http://java.sun.com/docs/hotspot/gc1.4.2/fig4.gif > > which was taken from > > http://java.sun.com/docs/hotspot/gc1.4.2/ > > .....also see Moazam Raja's explanation in the following blog entry: > > http://www.unixville.com/~moazam/stories/2004/05/17/maxpermsizeAndHowItRelat > esToTheOverallHeap.html > > Rob: > I too have heard the explanation about the object heap needing to occupy a > contiguous block of memory, and that Windows is only able to meet that > requirement up to 2GB. Incidently, this is also why the /3GB flag is useless > on Windows at least as far as a jvm process is concerned. The thing is that > even with these restrictions I thought you could still get a jvm process > that was closer to 2GB, as opposed to the 1.6GB I'm seeing in my tests. > There is even a ColdFusion TechNote that suggests that the maximum value > should be more like 1.8GB ( > http://www.adobe.com/cfusion/knowledgebase/index.cfm?id=tn_19359). It turns > out that, if you dig a little deeper, the maximum contiguous memory block > you can get in Windows is actually a bit less than 2GB because of the way > some of the system DLLs are loaded, and the fact that Windows implements two > "standard" 64KB holes in the virtual address space, one at the bottom, and > another near the 2GB boundary. > > I guess I'm beginning to answer my own question... Anybody else have any > additional thoughts on the matter? > > thx, > > -dante > > > > >
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:241159 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
