On Mon, 8 May 2023 14:03:18 GMT, Volker Simonis <simo...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/services/management.cpp line 2107:
>>
>>> 2105: // when result is initialized.
>>> 2106: jlong result = ThreadService::exited_allocated_bytes();
>>> 2107: for (JavaThreadIteratorWithHandle jtiwh; JavaThread *thread =
>>> jtiwh.next();) {
>>
>> If you call `exited_allocated_bytes` whilst you have an active
>> `ThreadsListHandle` then you at least ensure you don't miss accounting for
>> threads that are just about to terminate.
>
> Do you mean something like:
>
> JavaThreadIteratorWithHandle jtiwh;
> jlong result = ThreadService::exited_allocated_bytes();
> while (JavaThread *thread = jtiwh.next()) {
> ...
>
> That would be fine for me. Otherwise I agree with the current compromise
> between accuracy and speed.
Yes. Though I realize my comment needed to make clear that you need a thread to
update the count after it has removed itself from the thread-list, for this to
be an improvement.
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/13814#discussion_r1188020260
