On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 12:57 PM Jesse Glick <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Any notion yet of why that would be?

Why do you ask? The maximum heap size seems to have been 1516 MiB in
e.g. 
https://ci.jenkins.io/job/Infra/job/pipeline-steps-doc-generator/job/master/299/consoleFull
but had dropped to 954 MiB by e.g.
https://ci.jenkins.io/job/Infra/job/pipeline-steps-doc-generator/job/master/322/consoleFull
so the problem with pipeline-steps-doc-generator seems clear to me:
the operators mistakenly reduced the memory size of the test system,
and the job happened to continue to work for a while until organic
growth exposed the original operational issue. With the operational
issue resolved, PRs like jenkins-infra/pipeline-steps-doc-generator#92
are now passing against recent core releases. As far as I can tell,
this was a false alarm. I should not have been pinged about this.

I do not think it is appropriate to imply that a developer caused a
regression (for example, by describing jenkinsci/jenkins#5687 as "the
culprit") simply because an operational failure occurred. The cause of
the operational failure should be understood, and if that cause points
to a regression caused by a developer (such as a memory leak), then
the developer should be notified.

Anyway, one theory is that the organic increase in heap usage may be
coming from ClassLoader#getClassLoadingLock(String). If the
ClassLoader object is registered as parallel-capable, this method
returns a dedicated object associated with the specified class name;
otherwise, it returns the ClassLoader object. Perhaps there are enough
of these dedicated objects to cause a modest increase in heap usage on
some installations (~300 MiB in the case of
pipeline-steps-doc-generator).

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Jenkins Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAFwNDjpyeqb_iVFgijd8_PqmSaZe7%3Dntk0FPNyrLqnGQZ7GwfA%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to