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 since G1 doesn't have CMS's failure risk, you can safely try G1 without needing to understand and accept scary risks).
However, based on the quick description you gave, it sounds like you might have invalid monitoring that is resulting in false positives. Filling memory (or even coming close) is not an error condition; what is, is having memory still full immediately after performing a full GC. The latter indicates that memory is full of *live objects* and therefore there is little or nothing available for use by the JVM; nothing else matters. So if your monitoring is considering memory usage without considering when the last full GC happened, it's not a valid check. (Unless your check threshold is higher than the full GC threshold, of course.) Tim On Feb 8, 2017 4:18 AM, "nigro_franz" <nigro....@gmail.com> wrote: > > 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. >
