Thomas Vatter wrote:
Kristian Waagan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
...
Hello Kristian,
I'm doing this on a Windows XP system, I start all java processes with
-Xmx1024m, I had a try with 2048 but the process did not start so I stayed
with 1024. "Between 912 and 960" is the total usage for the machine,
read from the task-manager. I have thought about it, derbys pageSize
is 4k, I have increased pageCacheSize from 1.000 to 10.000, resulting
in 40mb steps, this would explain that memory "ends" before 1024 is
reached. Yes, I was unprecise for shortness with the word "record".
I should have said "record in the main database table" or "dataset".
But you are right, a dataset (or line) in my spreadsheet has around
30 fields only. I had the network server running on the described machine,
because I am testing how derby performes in the network situation,
because in the single user situation I have typically less data.
tom
Okay, thank you for the answers.
Just to be clear, I would have tried running the Derby network server on
a separate machine, and see where the the memory usage goes sky-high;
the database machine or the application code machine.
You could also try running Derby with the default page cache size (1000
pages ~ 4MB) and *not* alter the JVM memory options. Performance could
go down, but if you are having problems with a memory leak it would show
pretty fast by getting an OutOfMemoryException.
--
Kristian
