Jano wrote: > Matthew Toseland wrote: > >> [B [I [C [[B almost certainly mean byte[], int[], char[], byte[][]. > > Good to know. > >> I didn't get jmap to work (maybe because I was using java 5), but I did >> do some invasive profiling (with stack traces), and used that to >> identify and eliminate some high-churn objects; if the current problem is >> that too much garbage collection is occurring (causing 100% cpu usage), >> this is most likely caused by too many objects being allocated per >> second. > > FWIW, I have the OoM problem but not high CPU problems (see my graphs > pending moderation). > > Though, as the point of OoM gets closer, the JVM will attempt a full OoM > each time it would run out of memory, so I'd say that in the final moments > of a node, CPU churn due to GC will be very high (I'll try to capture > these moments with jconsole, very nice tool).
It seems I was wrong. From the graphs I attach I'd say that the JVM didn't attempted very aggresively to GC before signaling OoM. This was a node configured with 256m. As you can see, CPU was never a big issue, and I had around 50 insertions running. My cpu is a dual core 2.8GHz one. I'm running now with 96m to see what happens... -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: death.gif Type: image/gif Size: 27642 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20070205/e093f0f0/attachment.gif>
