ry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR)
> Sent: Monday, June 28, 2010 11:24 AM
> To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
> Subject: Re: Memory use question
>
> Hi
>
> Well this is not something I would do in my shop. Not having swap
> available for Linux is just asking for trouble. One reason is that yo
-4191
-Original Message-
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:linux-...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of
Mrohs, Ray
Sent: Monday, June 28, 2010 10:21 AM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: Memory use question
This led me into an interesting area. I just set a couple of our test
servers to run without swap
tes
> Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 10:34 AM
> To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
> Subject: Re: Memory use question
>
> So with swappiness higher, Linux is making decsions to
> preemptively move something from memory to vdisk. Well, your
> vdisk is in VM's pageable memory too.
y by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for
your cooperation."
-Original Message-
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:linux-...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of Rob van
der Heij
Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 1:44 AM
To: LINUX-390@vm.marist.edu
Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] Memory u
"
-Original Message-
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:linux-...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of Mrohs, Ray
Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 5:53 AM
To: LINUX-390@vm.marist.edu
Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] Memory use question
> -Original Message-
> From: Linux on 390 Port
by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for
your cooperation."
-Original Message-
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:linux-...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of Mrohs, Ray
Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 5:53 AM
To: LINUX-390@vm.marist.edu
Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] Memory use question
> -Original Message-
> From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:linux-...@vm.marist.edu] On
> Behalf Of Marcy Cortes
> Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2010 3:45 PM
> To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
> Subject: Re: Memory use question
>
> Rob mentioned the vm.swappiness setting an
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 1:09 PM, Richard Gasiorowski wrote:
> Rob has a good point in resource usage and with GC it definitely is the
> lesser of two evils. I have never had an instance where after determining
> the GC Collector settings performance and % utilization suffered
> negatively. One
-390@vm.marist.edu
Date:
06/24/2010 04:45 AM
Subject:
Re: Memory use question
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 9:59 AM, Rodger Donaldson
wrote:
> Well, bearing in mind both the Sun and IBM JVMs default to memory
> settings that both IBM and Sun say are crap for app servers (e.g.
> neither using
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 9:59 AM, Rodger Donaldson
wrote:
> Well, bearing in mind both the Sun and IBM JVMs default to memory
> settings that both IBM and Sun say are crap for app servers (e.g.
> neither using their 1.4 or later GC algorithms by default), I'm not sure
> I'd place too much stock in
Rob van der Heij wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 8:47 PM, Mrohs, Ray wrote:
Rob,
Heap size is set to 500M/1000M. I've read recommendations to make default/max
the same number, but I would just be guessing at a value. It has grow close to
800M at least once, but it always falls back to around
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 8:47 PM, Mrohs, Ray wrote:
> Rob,
>
> Heap size is set to 500M/1000M. I've read recommendations to make default/max
> the same number, but I would just be guessing at a value. It has grow close
> to 800M at least once, but it always falls back to around the default size
M
To: LINUX-390@vm.marist.edu
Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] Memory use question
Marcy, thanks for the pointers. I verified that the thread pool default/max
numbers are the same, and the async I/O box remains unchecked. The swap space
used stays at 0 for a day or two, but slowly climbs. There are a
Original Message-
> From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:linux-...@vm.marist.edu] On
> Behalf Of Rob van der Heij
> Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2010 11:06 AM
> To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
> Subject: Re: Memory use question
>
> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 4:46 PM, Mrohs, Ray
>
sday, June 23, 2010 11:12 AM
> To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
> Subject: Re: Memory use question
>
>
> It's called a native memory leak.
> Lots of things can cause it.
> Thread pools, asynci i/o are two areas where this can happen.
> See http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docvi
Also:
"so maybe there is incremental swap space saturation over time?"
Use your perf tool and plot out the last 30 days of swap size to see if it
looks like a leak.
Marcy
"This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you
are not the addressee or authorized to rec
0@vm.marist.edu
Subject: [LINUX-390] Memory use question
Hi,
I am experimentally minimizing the footprint of a SLES10 WebSphere 7 instance
and seeing the following.
Swap is to v-disk.
top:
Tasks: 120 total, 3 running, 117 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
Cpu(s): 5.3%us, 0.3%sy, 0.0%ni, 9
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 4:46 PM, Mrohs, Ray wrote:
> The cache number looks interesting because it remains large while swap space
> is being used up. This particular
> instance has been up for 30+ days, so maybe there is incremental swap space
> saturation over time?
Swappiness setting makes L
Hi,
I am experimentally minimizing the footprint of a SLES10 WebSphere 7 instance
and seeing the following.
Swap is to v-disk.
top:
Tasks: 120 total, 3 running, 117 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
Cpu(s): 5.3%us, 0.3%sy, 0.0%ni, 94.0%id, 0.3%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st
Mem: 2050776k
19 matches
Mail list logo
