Is there any condition when application will never perform Garbage Collection ? Theoretically is it possible to have such application design ?
Yes, there is. Please read about memory leaks in Java. An example is described in Effective Java Item 6: Eliminate obsolete object references
Garbage collection happens on objects which are not referenced anymore in your application.
With Java 11, there is a way to never purposely perform garbage collection, by running your JVM with the newly introduced Epsilon GC, a garbage collector which handles memory allocation but never releases the allocated memory.
There is at least one product in the market that implements high frequency trading using Java and jvm technology.
Obviously, an application that needs to react in microseconds can't afford a garbage collector to kick in and halt the system for arbitrary periods of time.
In this case, the solution was to write the whole application to never create objects that turn into garbage. For example, all input data is kept in fixed byte arrays (that are allocated once at start time) which are then used as buffers for all kinds of processing.
Unless I am mistaken, you can listen to more details on the software engineering radio podcast. I think it should be this episode: http://www.se-radio.net/2016/04/se-radio-episode-255-monica-beckwith-on-java-garbage-collection/
Is there any condition when application will never perform Garbage Collection ?
You can prevent the GC from running by having a Thread which doesn't reach a safe point.
Unless you use a concurrent collector, the GC will only be performed when a memory region, e.g. when the Eden or Tenure spaces fill.
If you make these large enough, and your garbage rate low enough, the GC won't run for long enough that you can either perform a GC overnight, in a maintenance window or restart the process.
Theoretically is it possible to have such application design?
I have worked on applications which GC less than once per day (and some of them are restarted every day)
For example, say you produce 300KB of garbage per second, or 1 GB per hour, with a 24 GB Eden size you can run for a whole day without a collection.
In reality, if you move most of your data off-heap e.g. Chronicle Map or Queue, you might find a 4 GB, can run for a day or even a week with a minor collection.
Related
I have a Java client which consumes a large amount of data from a server. If the client does not keep up with the data stream at a fast enough rate, the server disconnects the socket connection. My client gets disconnected a few times per day. I ran jconsole to see the memory usage, and the heap space graph looks like a fairly well defined sawtooth pattern, oscillating between about 0.5GB and 1.8GB (2GB of heap space is allocated). But every time I get disconnected is during a full GC (but not on every full GC). I see the full GC takes a bit over 1 second on average. Depending on the time of day, full GC happens as often as every 5 minutes when busy, or up to 30 minutes can go by in between full GCs during the slow periods.
I suspect if I can reduce the full GC time, the client will be able to better keep up with the incoming data, but I do not have much experience with GC tuning. Does anyone have some insight on if this might be a good idea, and how to do it? Or is there an alternative idea which may work as well?
** UPDATE **
I used -XX:+UseConcMarkSweepGC and it improved, but I still got disconnected during the very busy moments. So I increased the heap allocation to 3GB to help weather through the busy moments and it seems to be chugging along pretty well now, but it's only been 1 day without a disconnection. Maybe if I get some time I will go through and try to reduce the amount of garbage created which I'm confident will help as well. Thanks for all the suggestions.
Full GC could take very long to complete, and is not that easy to tune.
One way to (easily) tune it is to increase the heap space - generally speaking, double the heap space can double the interval between two GCs, but will double the time consumed by a GC. If the program you are running has very clear usage patterns, maybe you can consider increase the heap space to make the interval so large that you can guarantee to have some idle time to try to make the system perform a GC. On the other hand, following this logic, if the heap is small a full garbage collection will finish in a instant, but that seems like inviting more troubles than helping.
Also, -XX:+UseConcMarkSweepGC might help since it will try to perform the GC operations concurrently (not stopping your program; see here).
Here's a very nice talk by Til Gene (CTO of Azul systems, maker of high performance JVM, and published several GC algos), about GC in JVM in general.
It is not easy to tune away the Full GC. A much better approach is to produce less garbage. Producing less garbage reduces pressure on the collection to pass objects into the tenured space where they are more expensive to collect.
I suggest you use a memory profiler to
reduce the amount of garbage produced. In many applications this can be reduce by a factor of 2 - 10x relatively easily.
reduce the size of the objects you are creating e.g. use primitive and smaller datatypes like double instead of BigDecimal.
recycle mutable object instead of discarding them.
retain less data on the client if you can.
By reducing the amount of garbage you create, objects are more likely to die in the eden, or survivor spaces meaning you have far less Full collections, which can be shorter as well.
Don't take it for granted you have to live with lots of collections, in extreme cases you can avoid it almost completely http://vanillajava.blogspot.ro/2011/06/how-to-avoid-garbage-collection.html
Take out calls to Runtime.getRuntime().gc() - When garbage collection is triggered manually it either does nothing or it does a full stop-the-world garbage collection. You want incremental GC to happen.
Have you tried using the server jvm from a jdk install? It changes a bunch of the default configuration settings (including garbage collection) and is easy to try - just add -server to your java command.
java -server
What is all the garbage that gets created? Can you generate less of it? Where possible, try to use the valueOf methods. By using less memory you'll save yourself time in gc AND in memory allocation.
I am currently running an application which requires a maximum heap size of 16GB.
Currently I use the following flags to handle garbage collection.
-XX\:+UseParNewGC, -XX\:+UseConcMarkSweepGC, -XX:CMSInitiatingOccupancyFraction=50, -XX\:+DisableExplicitGC, -XX\:+PrintGCDateStamps, -XX\:+PrintGCDetails, -Xloggc\:/home/user/logs/gc.log
However, I have noticed that during some garbage collections, the application locks up for a few seconds and then carries on - This is completely unacceptable as it's a game server.
An exert from my garbage collection logs can be found here.
Any advice on what I should change in order to reduce these long pauses would be greatly appreciated.
Any advice on what I should change in order to reduce these long pauses would be greatly appreciated.
The chances are that the CMS GC cannot keep up with the amount of garbage your system is generating. But the work that the GC has to perform is actually more closely related to the amount of NON-garbage that your system is retaining.
So ...
Try to reduce the actual memory usage of your application; e.g. by not caching so much stuff, or reducing the size of your "world".
Try to reduce the rate at which your application generates garbage.
Upgrade to a machine with more cores so that there are more cores available to run the parallel GC threads when necessary.
To Mysticial:
Yes in hindsight, it might have been better to implement the server in C++. However, we don't know anything about "the game". If it involves a complicated world model with complicated heterogeneous data structures, then implementing it in C++ could mean that that you replace the "GC pause" problem with the problem that the server crashes all the time due to problems with the way it manages its data structures.
Looking at your logs, I don't see any long pauses. But young GC is very frequent. Promotion rate is very low though (most garbage cleared by young GC as it should). At same time your old space utilization is low.
BTW are we talking about minecraft server?
To reduce frequency of young GC you should increase its size. I would suggest start with -XX:NewSize=8G -XX:MaxNewSize=8G
For such large young space, you should also reduce survivor space size -XX:SurvivorRatio=512
GC tuning is a path of trial and errors, so you may need some more iterations and tweaking.
You can find couple of useful articles at mu blog
HotSpot JVM GC options cheatsheet
Understanding young GC pauses in HotSpot JVM
I'm not an expert on Java garbage collection, but it looks like you're doing the right thing by using the concurrent collector (the UseConcMarkSweepGC flag), assuming the server has multiple processors. Follow the suggestions for troubleshooting at http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/gc-tuning-6-140523.html#cms. If you already have, let us know what happened when you tried them.
Which version of java are you using?http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/technotes/guides/vm/G1.html
For better try to minimize the use of instance variables in a class.It would be better to perform on local variables than instance varibles .It helps in gaining the performance and safe from synchronization problem.In the end of operation before exit of program always reset the used variables if you are using instance variables and set again when it is required. It helps more in enhancing performance.Besides in the version of java a good garbage collection policy is implemented.It would be better to move to new version if that is fleasible.
Also you can monitor the garbage collector pause time via VisualVm and you can get more idea when it is performing more garbage collection.
Why the method call System.gc() doesn't guarantee that the Garbage Collector algorithm will run at that moment? Why it cannot certainly reclaim all unused object's memory whenever it is invoked ?
Forcing object destruction is sign of bad coding so Java might wanted to avoid developers from getting addicted to it.
If Java gives you freedom of forcing of object destruction, improper use of it might have adverse affect of application performance.
This restriction allows you (force you) to put more focus into business logic than memory managemnt
JVM is the best person to decide when memory management is required and how to do it.
You can (should) trust JVM and let it handle things in better way than we can.
Still do you really want to force object destruction? If yes, WHY?
In order to ensure that programs run smoothly within the JVM, the JVM itself manages garbage collection.
Garbage collection has become quite sophisticated. When you ask the system for a GC run, which algorithm are you expecting? A "full GC"? There are multiple heaps, as well; which one is the garbage you are concerned about on? You don't know and this method doesn't indicate.
Suppose calling System.gc() always triggered a full GC. An errant program could easily grind JVM performance to a halt. Defensively, the JVM would want to limit the frequency at which it responded to such calls.
If you are running in a JVM on a non-embedded system (e.g. a server or a desktop computer), there should be no reason for you to concern yourself with any aspect of memory management other than to monitor it and code efficiently.
There are several metrics that are utilized to evaluate garbage collector performance , some of them are:
Throughput—the percentage of total time not spent in garbage collection, considered over long periods of time.
Garbage collection overhead—the inverse of throughput, that is, the percentage of total time spent in
garbage collection.
Pause time—the length of time during which application execution is stopped while garbage collection is occurring.
Frequency of collection—how often collection occurs, relative to application execution.
Footprint—a measure of size, such as heap size.
Promptness—the time between when an object becomes garbage and when the memory becomes
available.
Now If JVM listens to System.gc() like good pet and guarantees to perform action on each System.gc() call, Imagine what would be the performance of application if it is called many times within program.!!??
Throughput will decrease
Garbage Collection overhead will increase.
Application will pause many times as it is busy in recollecting the memory.
If Footprint is large , The garbage Collector would have to scan all memory area for recovering the memory , no matter if there are objects eligible for garbage collection or not.
So , after looking through these points I guess it provides the sufficient reason to JVM to not respond to System.gc on the application choice , but on its own algorithm. And Garbage Collection reclaims all unused object's memory for sure , but its invocation is entirely dependent on JVM own Algorithm rather than on the user's choice.
Source: Memory Management in the Java HotSpot™ Virtual Machine - Sun Microsystems
it cannot certainly reclaim all unused object's memory whenever it is invoked
This assumption of yours is false. In most cases the Garbage Collector could reclaim all unused objects at any point in time. However, if the standard Java library provided a method that would guarantee that, it would put a completely unreasonable burden on the GC subsystem to provide a service that is most of the time useless and could be even damaging.
I have developed a J2ME web browser application, it is working fine. I am testing its memory consumption. It seems to me that it has a memory leak, because the green curve that represents the consumed memory of the memory monitor (of the wireless toolkit) reaches the maximum allocated memory (which is 687768 bytes) every 7 requests done by the browser, (i.e. when the end user navigates in the web browser from one page to other for 7 pages) after that the garbage collector runs and frees the allocated memory.
My question is:
is it a memory leak when the garbage collector runs automatically every 7 page navigation?
Do I need to run the garbage collector (System.gc()) manually one time per request to prevent the maximum allocated memory to be reached?
Please guide me, thanks
To determine if it is a memory leak, you would need to observe it more.
From your description, i.e. that once the maximum memory is reached, the GC kicks in and is able to free memory for your application to run, it does not sound like there is a leak.
Also you should not call GC yourself since
it is only an indication
could potentially affect the underlying algorithm affecting its performance.
You should instead focus on why your application needs so much memory in such a short period.
My question is: is it a memory leak when the garbage collector runs automatically every 7 page navigation?
Not necessarily. It could also be that:
your heap is too small for the size of problem you are trying to solve, or
your application is generating (collectable) garbage at a high rate.
In fact, given the numbers you have presented, I'm inclined to think that this is primarily a heap size issue. If the interval between GC runs decreased over time, then THAT would be evidence that pointed to a memory leak, but if the rate stays steady on average, then it would suggest that the rate of memory usage and reclamation are in balance; i.e. no leak.
Do I need to run the garbage collector (System.gc()) manually one time per request to prevent the maximum allocated memory to be reached?
No. No. No.
Calling System.gc() won't cure a memory leak. If it is a real memory leak, then calling System.gc() will not reclaim the leaked memory. In fact, all you will do is make your application RUN A LOT SLOWER ... assuming that the JVM doesn't ignore the call entirely.
Direct and indirect evidence that the default behaviour of HotSpot JVMs is to honour System.gc() calls:
"For example, the default setting for the DisableExplicitGC option causes JVM to honor Explicit garbage collection requests." - http://pic.dhe.ibm.com/infocenter/wasinfo/v7r0/topic/com.ibm.websphere.express.doc/info/exp/ae/rprf_hotspot_parms.html
"When JMX is enabled in this way, some JVMs (such as Sun's) that do distributed garbage collection will periodically invoke System.gc, causing a Full GC." - http://static.springsource.com/projects/tc-server/2.0/getting-started/html/ch11s07.html
"It is best to disable explicit GC by using the flag -XX:+DisableExplicitGC." - http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E19396-01/819-0084/pt_tuningjava.html
And from the Java 7 source code:
./openjdk/hotspot/src/share/vm/runtime/globals.hpp
product(bool, DisableExplicitGC, false, \
"Tells whether calling System.gc() does a full GC") \
where the false is the default value for the option. (And note that this is in the OS / M/C independent part of the code tree.)
I wrote a library that makes a good effort to force the GC. As mentioned before, System.gc() is asynchronous and won't do anything by itself. You may want to use this library to profile your application and find the spots where too much garbage is being produced. You can read more about it in this article where I describe the GC problem in detail.
That is (semi) normal behavior. Available (unreferenced) storage is not collected until the size of the heap reaches some threshold, triggering a collection cycle.
You can reduce the frequency of GC cycles by being a bit more "heap aware". Eg, a common error in many programs is to parse a string by using substring to not only parse off the left-most word, but also shorten the remaining string by substringing to the right. Creating a new String for the word is not easily avoided, but one can easily avoid repeatedly substringing the "tail" of the original string.
Running System.GC will accomplish nothing -- on most platforms it's a no-op, since it's so commonly abused.
Note that (outside of brain-dead Android) you can't have a true "memory leak" in Java (unless there's a serious JVM bug). What's commonly referred to as a "leak" in Java is the failure to remove all references to objects that will never be used again. Eg, you might keep putting data into a chain and never clear pointers to the stuff on the far end of the chain that is no longer going to be used. The resulting symptom is that the MINIMUM heap used (ie, the size immediately after GC runs) keeps rising each cycle.
Adding to the other excellent answers:
Looks like you are confusing memory leak with garbage collection.
Memory leak is when unused memory cannot be garbage collected because it still has references somewhere (although they're not used for anything).
Garbage collection is when a piece of software (the garbage collector) frees unreferenced memory automatically.
You should not call the garbage collector manually because that would affect its performance.
This question is a follow up to my previous Java GC question: Java Garbage Collector clarification
This question is also referring to the same article.
I'm a little confused on why the stop and copy method for defragmenting object heap allocation is so commonly used. Yes it defragments the heap however it seems like there is tons of overhead because basically you cut the total amount of heap size in half. Also you need to copy ALL the live objects when one half has run out of space.
Other than defragmentation is there any other fundamental reason why 'stop and copy' is better than say 'mark and sweep'?
Actually, fragmentation is fundamental, and the ability of some GC to defeat it is a considerable asset.
The stop-and-copy algorithm used to be popular in GC implementations because:
it is simple to implement;
it automatically defragments memory;
its running time is proportional to the amount of live objects, which makes it asymptotically very efficient.
More modern GC, including those used in Java, use much more complex strategies because they want to make short pauses (rather than making total GC time low, they prefer never to stop the application for a long time, because pauses are bad for interactivity), to interact more cleanly with caches and virtual memory, and to benefit from systems with multiple CPU.
The Jones and Lins book is a must-read for whoever wants to understand garbage collection.
A great tutorial on the garbage collector is Tuning Garbage Collection (unfortunately the new oracle website has messed its formatting up quiet a lot).
Your question is handled in chapter V. This basically explains which types of strategies you can use in the Java garbage collector and which are default. Most desktop applications will be interested in a stop that is as small as possible, because this is what the user might notice.
Note that your question is not about defragmentation. Both will eventually compress the memory space.