For now, let's disregard my tangent. :) Why? because I know the goal is to keep moving forward instead of go back to earlier snapshot/release versions. :)
I just reverted to 2013-03-27 version of tomee 1.6.0 snapshot and just saw between 300m and 500m used (yes, with no time for GC to do its job), so let's skip the memory issue (for now). Mark/Romain, I'll try what you suggested about raising exception/etc, and report results at my earliest convenience. thanks. On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 1:34 AM, Howard W. Smith, Jr. <[email protected] > wrote: > Also, prior to using 2013-04-29 tomee 1.6.0 snapshot, I would check memory > used by TomEE and would see nice level right between 200m and 400m...a > lot...even while users are logged in, doing work. > > Again, prior to using 2013-04-29 tomee 1.6.0 snapshot, I was using > 2013-03-27 version for almost 1 month. I'm always quite satisfied with > snapshot versions (very stable and reliable, IMO). > > > > > On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 1:30 AM, Howard W. Smith, Jr. < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> >> On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 1:26 AM, Howard W. Smith, Jr. < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 1:19 AM, Mark Struberg <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Probably in TomEE we do not yet remove all our scanning results and >>>> temporary boot stuff after booting up the container. >>>> >>>> >>> I think I have recognized that whenever I do a heap dump and I search >>> 'classes' for 'jsf.'. >>> >> >> CLARIFICATION: i usually do heap dumps when TomEE is kinda/quite inactive >> (no users logged in)...just to monitor GC a bit. >> >> >>> >>> 'jsf.' is how i search for many of my beans, but 'myfaces' >>> classes/instances are always at the top of the list (which means myfaces >>> are using more memory than my classes). >>> >>> i usually only see 1 instance of my (normal) 'scoped' beans and my >>> largest bean is only using like 1,600(K) bytes, I think (that's a rough >>> estimate). >>> >>> >> CLARIFICATION: my non-normal-scoped beans usually list as '0' (zero) >> instances and I think 0 (zero) memory used... of course, they are at the >> bottom of the list. >> >> >> >
