Robin Garner wrote:
Designing a garbage collector with low pause times and high throughput (ie
low overhead) is to an extent the 'holy grail' of memory management
research.
Do you know much about this on in JRockit?
http://www.networkcomputing.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleId=193000182
(They used Geronimo to test too. w00t!)
The worst case pause times are in full heap collectors, where the pause
time is proportional to the total number of live objects in the heap.
Generational collection helps drive down the average pause time (nursery
collections are cheap) but the maximum pause time (when the mature space
needs collecting) is much the same as a full heap collector. A
generational collector with a bounded nursery can shorten the time of
minor collections, but has lower throughput and the same maximum pause
time.
To an extent, most of the literature on GC addresses this issue, and some
things you might like to read up on are:
- Metronome.
This pushes pause times down into the sub-millisecond realm, but at a
considerable (although predictable) overhead.
- The Sun 1.5 JVM, which has an optional concurrent collector for the
mature space
- Ulterior Reference Counting, which combines the high throughput of a
generational collector with the low pause times of reference counting.
- Beltway, which collects the heap in small chunks, after giving objects
time to die
- Free-me, which automatically identifies short-lived objects
Just to name a few.
cheers
Leo Li wrote:
Hi,all:
As we all know, java objects are allocated on heap instead of stack,
thus there is a problem about how to garbage collect short-lived objects
quickly.
In a recent real project I involved, a server built on java tries to
send thousands of messages to client per second. A lot of short-lived
messages is created as objects and discarded. (Although I can recycle
these
memory, there is still a byte array created during per call of nio read
and
write.) Since current GC strategy adopted by current RI starts to work
only
when the memory allocated approaching the limit of java heap, the work
of GC
is huge and will raise a wave on the server performance. Furthermore,
after
a long run, although I know GC will merge memory, the operating system
reports there is memory fragment and in the worst case the OS will even
report real memory is exhausted.
Of course it is possible to limit the java heap so as to force gc
frequently as a workround, is it preferrable to collect short-lived
objects
quickly such as adopt aged-related object queues as one of the gc
strategy?
What about the VMs here, drlvm or J9?
Interesting topic, I'm still dreaming of "free()" in Java (This dream
begins at the very beginning when I see Java, as C/C++ is my first
program language )However, it seems RI will never give us "free()". :)
Only a thought, Java may offer a key word "temp", indicating that this
variety can be freed at once.
Leo Li
China Software Development Lab, IBM
--
Best Regards!
Jimmy, Jing Lv
China Software Development Lab, IBM
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
