Re: space taken by ArrayLists for the 3 fields "partof", "beginMap", "endMap". Let's assume the number of distinct UIMA types in your application is 100. (Is this approximately right, or way off?).
Each Ruta instance would include 3 ArrayLists, each of which would be an array of 100 Java References. If you're running with < 32 GB heap, modern Javas store references as 4 byte things. So the approximate space taken by these arraylists would be Object-Overhead + some-fields-in-ArrayList + ObjectOverhead-for-ref-array + the-array-size. The last element is what you could potentially reduce with smaller array allocation. It's size is 4 * 100 (with above assumption) = 400 bytes. The overhead per java object runs maybe 24-32 bytes, so 2 of these would be, say 50 bytes. And then there's some more for ArrayList items, perhaps. These are "fixed". So, you might end up with 500 bytes per field, or 1500 for the 3 fields at the beginning. (This would be the size assuming these have no contents in them, of course). A lower bound for 250K instances of RutaBasic (just considering these 3 fields) would then be 250,000 * 500 = 125,000,000. This is in the ballpark of your estimate. One possible design revision to ease this may be to consider if all 250K instances of RutaBasic need to be in memory at a time. -Marshall On 2/28/2017 7:54 AM, Peter Klügl (JIRA) wrote: > [ > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/UIMA-5306?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15887936#comment-15887936 > ] > > Peter Klügl commented on UIMA-5306: > ----------------------------------- > > Maybe Marshall can comment on the memory consumption of the addresses? I > assume that the bottleneck is rather ruta. Have you measured the memory > footprint of your use case with about the same amount of annotations without > ruta? > > I know drools and rete a bit, but not PHREAK. I have to take a look. I > thought about automatic optimizations before but only for the speed. The > increased expressiveness of ruta makes this really complicated. As a > consequence, generic, all-encompassing automatic optimizations are not really > possible without restricting the expressiveness. Thus, only small > optimizations have been added in patches. There are also differences between > production rule systems and regular expression rule systems/FST. > I have not thought about automatic optimization concerning the memory > consumption. Maybe the situation will get better with uima 3 where the GC can > clean up stuff. There are still many possibilities to improve ruta concerning > speed and memory consumption, e.g., the prototype of the type usage I > implemented the last days. Or think about running ruta without RutaBasic at > all. > After all, it is always about the time one can invest to improve the system. > The further development, fixes and new features have always been driven by > current requirements, e.g., when it was not fast enough I did something to > improve the speed. > Your idea of removing information, that is not needed anymore, is very nice > and would be implementable if the type usage information is stored for every > other step in the rules, (and with some sort of dynamic RutaBasic). However, > I would bet that there are lower fruits. > > You are very welcome to participate. Ruta was born about 10 years ago and not > every part was developed in the same speed or with the same care. There are > still a lot of inherited waste and legacy issues, but I try to constantly > improve at least the code quality of ruta-core, which is also the part that > matters the most. If I can help you to get into the project somehow, just > let me know. Even if you just point out code that should be refactored. > Yeah, the RutaParser is terrible long, but most is just syntax grammar for > conditions and actions. I did not replace that for a generic rule so that I > do not lose the argument checks. > > >> Memory Improvement - Unnecessary leaks >> -------------------------------------- >> >> Key: UIMA-5306 >> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/UIMA-5306 >> Project: UIMA >> Issue Type: Improvement >> Components: Ruta >> Affects Versions: 2.3.0ruta >> Environment: Windows 10, JVM with -Xmx 1024, Java JDK 1.8., 16gb >> memory >> Reporter: Dennis Bauer >> Assignee: Peter Klügl >> >> In a productive setup we figured out, that there is a huge memory usage of >> Ruta itself. With JVisualVM it's easy to see, that there is a relative small >> amount of arrays of Arraylists but with a high memory consumption (250k >> instances result in 243 000 000 byte memory that are reserved) >> The problem is, that in a clustered SaaS environment with less memory, these >> arrays block relevant space in memory. A deeper look into these Arrays of >> Arraylist let suggest the class org.apache.uima.ruta.type.RutaBasic >> A look at this class show three arrays that are instanced with the max. >> possible value, that can be returned by the typesystem of CAS. >> {code:Java} >> private int[] partOf = new int[((TypeSystemImpl) >> getCAS().getTypeSystem()).getLargestTypeCode()]; >> private Collection<?>[] beginMap = new ArrayList<?>[((TypeSystemImpl) >> getCAS().getTypeSystem()) >> .getLargestTypeCode()]; >> private Collection<?>[] endMap = new ArrayList<?>[((TypeSystemImpl) >> getCAS().getTypeSystem()) >> .getLargestTypeCode()]; >> >> {code} >> In this improvement should be done an dynamic allocation of memory usage for >> these arrays, so the total memory consumption would be reduced. > > > -- > This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA > (v6.3.15#6346) >
