Did Old Gen continually increase *after* performing full GCs? That is, was
the Old Gen usage after full GC #N always greater than the Old Gen usage
after full GC #N+1? If not, you were concerned about something that doesn't
matter.
It's OK for Old Gen to grow; that's why we have a garbage collecto
Yes, we tested with G1 settings in load test environment. Old gen was still
increasing with it albeit a bit slower than parallel GC, so we never moved
ahead with it.
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Artems-ParallelGC-vs-CMS-tp4721722p4721737.html
Sent from
I second the suggestion about G1GC; if you would consider running CMS
(which is a hand grenade, and should be used only once you understand the
risk of Old Gen fragmentation and how it could result in an OOM even though
there is lots of RAM available), you should be considering G1 as well (and
sinc
I didn't know the "incremental mode" is being deprecated, great!
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Artems-ParallelGC-vs-CMS-tp4721722p4721748.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
CMS should not be used in incremental mode for any modern hardware - see
https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/technotes/guides/vm/gctuning/cms.html.
Try the below, and take a look at what the GC log output shows?
-Xms8G -Xmx8G -XX:+UseConcMarkSweepGC -XX:+UseParNewGC
-XX:+CMSClassUnloadingEn
Just a few ideas...
CMS is not a compacting collector, which can result in old generation
fragmentation: if there will be any memory leaks in the connection's
resources that makes the old generation filled with fragmented garbage, a
FullGC (with no results due to the leak!) is triggered to compact
Hi!
Just as a chrioisty, do you have tried G1 too?
Il mar 7 feb 2017, 22:07 abhijith ha scritto:
> Hi,
>
> Has there any test done for Artemis using CMS GC?
>
> Context: We were using default parallel GC with 6G RAM and were facing an
> issue where old gen was filling up without full GC being
