OJVM memory heap size
Is there a way to specify OJVM maximum memory ( memory heap )
for Oracle8i JServer? Oracle9i JServer?
How do I pass -Xmx parameter to OJVM?
Thanks
I played with JAVA_POOL_SIZE, JAVA_MAX_SESSIONSPACE_SIZE,
JAVA_SOFT_SESSIONSPACE_LIMIT and it seems that JServer just ignores them.
I use this Java function to get available space.
This function ALWAYS returns the same value ( about 120M for Oracle8i and 190M for 9i) in spite of init.ora parameters.
public static final int MEGABYTE = 1048576;
public static long testMemory(int maximumMegabytesToTest)
Object[] memoryHolder = new
Object[maximumMegabytesToTest];
int count = 0;
try
for (; count < memoryHolder.length; count++)
memoryHolder[count] = new byte[MEGABYTE];
catch(OutOfMemoryError bounded){}
long highWater = Runtime.getRuntime().totalMemory();
memoryHolder = null; //release for GC
System.out.println(highWater);
return count;
Please advise
Similar Messages
-
I am setting up directory proxy server 6.3 and have the java setting for memory heap size in my notes from testing last year. Is it important to set this? Is the argument as stated ok? And is 500 ok? Doubt anything has changed since last year, but want to be sure. Thanks.
dpadm set-flags /opt/dps jvm-args="-Xmx500M -Xms500M -XX:NewRatio=1"crosspost
-
Hi,
I would like to know how to set the default memory
heap size to 128 MB while installing the Java Plugin
itself.
Is there any environment variable available for setting
this?
I dont want to use the Control Panel option for setting
it.
Thanks for your help.Hey i have the same issue, how did you solve it?
Hi Gkumarc1,
Plugin 1.3.0 (and after) reads the property filein
.java directory of user's home directory. Java
runtime parameter is saved in the property file.Here
is an example of it:
# Java(TM) Plug-in Properties
# DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE. It is machine generated.
# Use the Activator Control Panel to editproperties.
javaplugin.jre.params=-Xmx 128m
Hope this helps.
Sun-DTSIs there a way to set the default heap size on the
fly? Meaning, we want to avoid the need for our
customers to go into their control panel and make
this setting. Instead, we would like to have the
applet load with our preferred default VM size. This
would allow us to change the preferred size during
some future performance enchancements without having
to contact all of our 2,000+ external customers. Is
there something that can be put in the PARAM tag
within the HTML that specifies the
preferred/recommended default size?
Any help would be greatly appreciated. -
How to set the Heap size for JAVA
I am facing the memory out of space problem:
Exception in thread "AWT-EventQueue-0" java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space
Could anyone suggest me a solution to solve the problem ?
increase the heap size ?
anyway to increase the heap size in the program by default without additional setup?
Thank you.How to determine the program must handled with increase heap size ?
could I know any method to know whether the program is memory leaking or need large memory heap size? -
Gurus,
Could some body help me to understand the differentiate between heap size parameters -Xms and -Xmx ? I usually change both of them. One another is that, the maximum heap size we can use is total ram/2 ?
Thanks,Text from the above link
==================
As part of the Best Practices, we know that we should be setting -Xms & -Xmx Java command line parameters. What are these settings and why is it required to set these.
As JAVA starts, it creates within the systems memory a Java Virtual Machine (JVM). JVM is where the complete processing of any Java program takes place. All JAVA applications (including IQv6) by default allocates & reserves up to 64 MB of memory resource pool from the system on which it is running.
The Xms is the initial / minimum Java memory (heap) size within the JVM. Setting the initial memory (heap) size higher can help in a couple of ways. First, it will allow garbage collection (GC) to work less which is more efficient. The higher initial memory value will cause the size of the memory (heap) not to have to grow as fast as a lower initial memory (heap) size, thereby saving the overhead of the Java VM asking the OS for more memory.
The Xmx is the maximum Java memory (heap) size within the Java Virtual Memory (JVM). As the JVM gets closer to fully utilizing the initial memory, it checks the Xmx settings to find out if it can draw more memory from the system resources. If can, it does so. For the JVM to allocate contiguous memory to itself is a very expensive operation. So as the JVM gets closer to the initial memory, the JVM will use aggressive garbage collection (to clean the memory and if possible avoid memory allocation), increasing the load on the system.
If JVM is in need of memory beyond the value set in Xmx, the JVM will not be able to draw more memory from system resource (even if available) and run out of memory. Hence, the -Xms and -Xmx memory parameters should be increased depending upon the demand estimation of the system. Ideally both same should be the same value (set at maximum possible as per demand estimation). This ensure that the maximum memory is allocated right at the start-up eliminating the need for extra memory allocation during program execution. We recommend aggressive maximum memory (heap) size of between 1/2 and 3/4 of physical memory.
Edited by: oracleSQR on Oct 7, 2009 10:38 AM -
Massive memory hemorrhage; heap size to go from about 64mb, to 1.3gb usage
**[SOLVED]**
Note: I posted this on stackoverflow as well, but a solution was not found.
Here's the problem:
[1] http://i.stack.imgur.com/sqqtS.png
As you can see, the memory usage balloons out of control! I've had to add arguments to the JVM to increase the heapsize just to avoid out of memory errors while I figure out what's going on. Not good!
##Basic Application Summary (for context)
This application is (eventually) going to be used for basic on screen CV and template matching type things for automation purposes. I want to achieve as high of a frame rate as possible for watching the screen, and handle all of the processing via a series of separate consumer threads.
I quickly found out that the stock Robot class is really terrible speed wise, so I opened up the source, took out all of the duplicated effort and wasted overhead, and rebuilt it as my own class called FastRobot.
##The Class' Code:
public class FastRobot {
private Rectangle screenRect;
private GraphicsDevice screen;
private final Toolkit toolkit;
private final Robot elRoboto;
private final RobotPeer peer;
private final Point gdloc;
private final DirectColorModel screenCapCM;
private final int[] bandmasks;
public FastRobot() throws HeadlessException, AWTException {
this.screenRect = new Rectangle(Toolkit.getDefaultToolkit().getScreenSize());
this.screen = GraphicsEnvironment.getLocalGraphicsEnvironment().getDefaultScreenDevice();
toolkit = Toolkit.getDefaultToolkit();
elRoboto = new Robot();
peer = ((ComponentFactory)toolkit).createRobot(elRoboto, screen);
gdloc = screen.getDefaultConfiguration().getBounds().getLocation();
this.screenRect.translate(gdloc.x, gdloc.y);
screenCapCM = new DirectColorModel(24,
/* red mask */ 0x00FF0000,
/* green mask */ 0x0000FF00,
/* blue mask */ 0x000000FF);
bandmasks = new int[3];
bandmasks[0] = screenCapCM.getRedMask();
bandmasks[1] = screenCapCM.getGreenMask();
bandmasks[2] = screenCapCM.getBlueMask();
Toolkit.getDefaultToolkit().sync();
public void autoResetGraphicsEnv() {
this.screenRect = new Rectangle(Toolkit.getDefaultToolkit().getScreenSize());
this.screen = GraphicsEnvironment.getLocalGraphicsEnvironment().getDefaultScreenDevice();
public void manuallySetGraphicsEnv(Rectangle screenRect, GraphicsDevice screen) {
this.screenRect = screenRect;
this.screen = screen;
public BufferedImage createBufferedScreenCapture(int pixels[]) throws HeadlessException, AWTException {
// BufferedImage image;
DataBufferInt buffer;
WritableRaster raster;
pixels = peer.getRGBPixels(screenRect);
buffer = new DataBufferInt(pixels, pixels.length);
raster = Raster.createPackedRaster(buffer, screenRect.width, screenRect.height, screenRect.width, bandmasks, null);
return new BufferedImage(screenCapCM, raster, false, null);
public int[] createArrayScreenCapture() throws HeadlessException, AWTException {
return peer.getRGBPixels(screenRect);
public WritableRaster createRasterScreenCapture(int pixels[]) throws HeadlessException, AWTException {
// BufferedImage image;
DataBufferInt buffer;
WritableRaster raster;
pixels = peer.getRGBPixels(screenRect);
buffer = new DataBufferInt(pixels, pixels.length);
raster = Raster.createPackedRaster(buffer, screenRect.width, screenRect.height, screenRect.width, bandmasks, null);
// SunWritableRaster.makeTrackable(buffer);
return raster;
}In essence, all I've changed from the original is moving many of the allocations from function bodies, and set them as attributes of the class so they're not called every time. Doing this actually had a significant affect on frame rate. Even on my severely under powered laptop, it went from ~4 fps with the stock Robot class, to ~30fps with my FastRobot class.
##First Test:
When I started outofmemory errors in my main program, I set up this very simple test to keep an eye on the FastRobot. Note: this is the code which produced the heap profile above.
public class TestFBot {
public static void main(String[] args) {
try {
FastRobot fbot = new FastRobot();
double startTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
for (int i=0; i < 1000; i++)
fbot.createArrayScreenCapture();
System.out.println("Time taken: " + (System.currentTimeMillis() - startTime)/1000.);
} catch (AWTException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}##Examined:
It doesn't do this every time, which is really strange (and frustrating!). In fact, it rarely does it at all with the above code. However, the memory issue becomes easily reproducible if I have multiple for loops back to back.
#Test 2
public class TestFBot {
public static void main(String[] args) {
try {
FastRobot fbot = new FastRobot();
double startTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
for (int i=0; i < 1000; i++)
fbot.createArrayScreenCapture();
System.out.println("Time taken: " + (System.currentTimeMillis() - startTime)/1000.);
startTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
for (int i=0; i < 500; i++)
fbot.createArrayScreenCapture();
System.out.println("Time taken: " + (System.currentTimeMillis() - startTime)/1000.);
startTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
for (int i=0; i < 200; i++)
fbot.createArrayScreenCapture();
System.out.println("Time taken: " + (System.currentTimeMillis() - startTime)/1000.);
startTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
for (int i=0; i < 1500; i++)
fbot.createArrayScreenCapture();
System.out.println("Time taken: " + (System.currentTimeMillis() - startTime)/1000.);
} catch (AWTException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}##Examined
The out of control heap is now reproducible I'd say about 80% of the time. I've looked all though the profiler, and the thing of most note (I think) is that the garbage collector seemingly stops right as the fourth and final loop begins.
The output form the above code gave the following times:
Time taken: 24.282 //Loop1
Time taken: 11.294 //Loop2
Time taken: 7.1 //Loop3
Time taken: 70.739 //Loop4
Now, if you sum the first three loops, it adds up to 42.676, which suspiciously corresponds to the exact time that the garbage collector stops, and the memory spikes.
[2] http://i.stack.imgur.com/fSTOs.png
Now, this is my first rodeo with profiling, not to mention the first time I've ever even thought about garbage collection -- it was always something that just kind of worked magically in the background -- so, I'm unsure what, if anything, I've found out.
##Additional Profile Information
[3] http://i.stack.imgur.com/ENocy.png
Augusto suggested looking at the memory profile. There are 1500+ `int[]` that are listed as "unreachable, but not yet collected." These are surely the `int[]` arrays that the `peer.getRGBPixels()` creates, but for some reason they're not being destroyed. This additional info, unfortunately, only adds to my confusion, as I'm not sure why the GC wouldn't be collecting them
##Profile using small heap argument -Xmx256m:
At irreputable and Hot Licks suggestion I set the max heap size to something significantly smaller. While this does prevent it from making the 1gb jump in memory usage, it still doesn't explain why the program is ballooning to its max heap size upon entering the 4th iteration.
[4] http://i.stack.imgur.com/bR3NP.png
As you can see, the exact issue still exists, it's just been made smaller. ;) The issue with this solution is that the program, for some reason, is still eating through all of the memory it can -- there is also a marked change in fps performance from the first the iterations, which consume very little memory, and the final iteration, which consumes as much memory as it can.
The question remains why is it ballooning at all?
##Results after hitting "Force Garbage Collection" button:
At jtahlborn's suggestion, I hit the Force Garbage Collection button. It worked beautifully. It goes from 1gb of memory usage, down to the basline of 60mb or so.
[5] http://i.stack.imgur.com/x4282.png
So, this seems to be the cure. The question now is, how do I pro grammatically force the GC to do this?
##Results after adding local Peer to function's scope:
At David Waters suggestion, I modified the `createArrayCapture()` function so that it holds a local `Peer` object.
Unfortunately no change in the memory usage pattern.
[6] http://i.stack.imgur.com/Ky5vb.png
Still gets huge on the 3rd or 4th iteration.
#Memory Pool Analysis:
###ScreenShots from the different memory pools
##All pools:
[7] http://i.stack.imgur.com/nXXeo.png
##Eden Pool:
[8] http://i.stack.imgur.com/R4ZHG.png
##Old Gen:
[9] http://i.stack.imgur.com/gmfe2.png
Just about all of the memory usage seems to fall in this pool.
Note: PS Survivor Space had (apparently) 0 usage
##I'm left with several questions:
(a) does the Garbage Profiler graph mean what I think it means? Or am I confusing correlation with causation? As I said, I'm in an unknown area with these issues.
(b) If it is the garbage collector... what do I do about it..? Why is it stopping altogether, and then running at a reduced rate for the remainder of the program?
(c) How do I fix this?
Does anyone have any idea what's going on here?
[1]: http://i.stack.imgur.com/sqqtS.png
[2]: http://i.stack.imgur.com/fSTOs.png
[3]: http://i.stack.imgur.com/ENocy.png
[4]: http://i.stack.imgur.com/bR3NP.png
[5]: http://i.stack.imgur.com/x4282.png
[6]: http://i.stack.imgur.com/Ky5vb.png
[7]: http://i.stack.imgur.com/nXXeo.png
[8]: http://i.stack.imgur.com/R4ZHG.png
[9]: http://i.stack.imgur.com/gmfe2.png
Edited by: 991051 on Feb 28, 2013 11:30 AM
Edited by: 991051 on Feb 28, 2013 11:35 AM
Edited by: 991051 on Feb 28, 2013 11:36 AM
Edited by: 991051 on Mar 1, 2013 9:44 AMSO came through.
Turns out this issue was directly related to the garbage collector. The default one, for whatever reason, would get behind on its collection at points, and thus the memory would balloon out of control, which then, once allocated, became the new normal for the GC to operate at.
Manually setting the GC to ConcurrentMarkSweep solved this issue completely. After numerous tests, I have been unable to reproduce the memory issue. The garbage collector does an excellent job of keeping on top of these minor collections. -
Memory Usage in WinTaskManger vs heap size
hello,
I have exactly the same problem as in the topic "Windows Task Manager vs. Heap", posted at Dec 10, 2004 5:17 AM, by jorgeHX.
Here are the symptoms:
1) My application starts at 20MB seen by windows task manager
2) I use profiler to monitor the heap. Heap is always working very healthly - heap size in the profiler increases by a minimum until the gc comes around so that the used heap size drops down again.
3) However, after doing a relatively memory-consuming operation (loop of String indexing, patterning ..etc.), the memory usage in windows task manager goes up couple of MBs but never drops down.
4) Then I go manually free the heap (System.gc()), I can see GC is freeing heap. However, the memory in windows task manager remains no change, no matter how many times I force the garbabge collection.
This is a bad thing - if my application keeps doing that memory-consuming operation again and again, the memory seen in the windows task manager will be growing and growing to hundreds of MBs until the windows alerts "low on virtual memory".
I tried everything already. I set every instance = null at the end, I delete every reference but the memory just keeps increasing! WHY?????
Anyone can help me charactorize the problem? I am so in dark!!
Ryan-ChiI guess my problem can also be interpretated as
"Why doesn't JVM return memory to OS?"
It does, depending on the setting of the -XX:MaxHeapFreeRatio option. "Normal" operation using the default setting does not usually cause memory to be returned to the os.
Search for this option term for explanations. -
Mapping set heap sizes to used memory
Hi all,
I've got a question about the parameters used to control your java process' heap sizes: "-Xms128m -Xmx256m" etc.
Let's say I set my min and max to 2Gb, just for a simplistic example.
If I then look at the linux server my process is running on, I may see a top screen like so:
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
10647 javaprog 20 0 2180m 1.9g 18m S 1.3 3.7 1:57.02 javaWhat I'm trying to understand is what relationship - if any - there is between these arguments and the figures I see within top. One thing in particular that I'm interested in is the fact that I occasionally see a RES (or more commonly a VIRT) size higher than the maximum that I have provided to Java. Naively I would assume that therefore there isn't a relationship between the two... but I wouldn't mind someone clarifiying this for me.
Any resources on the matter would be appreciated, and I apologise if this question is outside the realms of this particular subforum.
Dave.Peter Lawrey wrote:
user5287726 wrote:
Peter Lawrey wrote:
It will always reserve this much virtual memory, plus. In term of resident memory, even the minimum is not guarenteed to be used. The minimum specifies at what point it will make little effort to recycle memory. i.e. it grows to the minimum size freely, but a "Hello World" program still won't use the minimum size.No, Linux does not reserve virtual memory. Just Google "Linux memory overcommit". Out-of-the-box, every Linux distro I'm aware of will just keep returning virtual memory to processes until things fall apart and the kernel starts killing processes that are using lots of memory - like your database server, web server, or application-critical JVMs. You know - the very processes you built and deployed the machine to run. Just Google "Linux OOM killer".Thats not the behaviour I see. When I start a process which busy waits, but doesn't create any objects, the virtual memory sized used is based on the -mx option, not how much is used. Given virtual memeory is largely free, why would an OS only give virtual memory on an as needs basis.
Busy looping process which does nothing.
In each case the resident size is 16m
option virtual size
-mx100m 368m = 100m + 268m
-mx250m 517m = 250m + 267m
-mx500m 769m = 500m + 269m
-mx1g 1294m = 1024m + 270m
-mx2g 2321m = 2048m + 273mTo me it appears that the maximum size you ask is immediately added to the virtual memory size, even if its not used (plus an overhead) i.e. the resident size is only 16m.Yes, it's only using 16m. And its virtual size may very well be what you see. But that doesn't mean the OS actually has enough RAM + swap the hold what it tells all running processes they can have.
How much RAM + swap does your machine have? Say it's 4 GB. You can probably run 10 or 20 JVMs simultaneously with the "-mx2g" option. Imagine what happens, though, if they actually try and use that memory - that the OS said they could have, but which doesn't all exist.
What happens?
The OOM killer fires up and starts killing processes. Which ones? Gee, it's a "standard election procedure". Which on a server that's actually doing something tend to be the processes actually doing something, like your DBMS or web server or JVM. Or maybe it's your backups that get whacked because they're "newly started" and got promised access to memory that doesn't exist.
Memory overcommit on a server with availability and reliability requirements more stringent than risible is indefensible. -
Heap size memory error on WebI Reports
Hello,
I'm developping my own JDBC driver to report specific data in Business Objects. I've actually an universe build on this driver and a web intelligence report. When I try to request I've an heap size error due to the size of my jvm. My JBDC driver is deployed thanks to a jar file. Normally I can increase jvm size with the argument -Xmx256M in command-line.
I tried several things :
I modified register HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE/SYSTEM/CurrentControlSet/Control/Session Manager/Subsystems, SharedSection to 1024,3072,1024
I passed Tomcat's memory to 1024, I can't more because I'm on 32 bits on Windows Server 2003.
I tried to add MAX_HEAP_SIZE=1024000000 on webi.properties in c:\programfiles\Tomcat\webapps\businessobjects\enterprise115\desktoplaunch\WEB-INF\classes\, as explained on a post,but this directory doesn't exist, but there is 4 different webi.properties files one in C:\Program Files\Business Objects\Tomcat55\webapps\PerformanceManagement\WEB-INF\lib so I added max heap size parameter in this one.
I improved my JDBC-driver to avoid memory leak, and BO requests to limit results.
But I still have an heap size error.
Some people have other ideas to solve my problem ?
Best regards.
BO XI 3.1 Service Pack 2 HotFix 1
Tomcat 5.5 : 1024Mo memory allocation
Windows Server 2003 32bitsHi Hizam,
1. Go to universe and click on View--> Structure
2. Check objects and Conditions.
3. If you found any changes then re-export your universe and run queries.
Once everything goes fine then Schedule the report.
Hope it helps you....!!
Thank You! -
How to increase Memory and Java Heap Size for Content Server
Hi,
My content server is processing requests very slowly. Over performance is not good. I have 2 GB of RAM any idea what files I can modify to increase the Java Heap Size for the Content Server. If I increase the RAM to 4 or 6 GB where do I need to make changes for the Java Heap Size and what are the recommended values. I just have Content Server Running on the linux box. Or how do I assign more memory to the user that owns the content server install.
ThanksYou might find these interesting:
http://blogs.oracle.com/fusionecm/2008/10/how_to_-javatuning.html
http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E10316_01/cs/cs_doc_10/documentation/admin/performance_tuning_10en.pdf
Do you have access to metalink? This has about everything you could want:
https://metalink2.oracle.com/metalink/plsql/f?p=130:14:9940589543422282072::::p14_database_id,p14_docid,p14_show_header,p14_show_help,p14_black_frame,p14_font:NOT,788210.1,1,1,1,helvetica
Or search for "788210.1" in metalink knowledgebase if that link doesn't work and look for the FAQ on configuring Java for Content Servers -
Memory Notification:Library Cache Object loaded in Heap size 2262K exceeds
Dear all
I am facing the following problem. I am using Oracle 10gR2 on Windows.
Please help me.
Memory Notification: Library Cache Object loaded into SGA
Heap size 2262K exceeds notification threshold (2048K)
KGL object name :XDB.XDbD/PLZ01TcHgNAgAIIegtw==
ThanksThis is a normal warning message displayed for release 10.2.0.1.0, this is just a bug that by default has declared the kgllarge_heap_warning_threshold instance parameter to 8388608 . The bug is harmless, but the problem is that you will see a lot of messages displayed on the alert.log file, which renders this file difficult to read and it is uncomfortable to spot the real errors.
Just declare a higher value for the kgllarge_heap_warning_threshold undocumented instance parameter. This is meant to be corrected at 10.2.0.2.0, but you can manually have this parameter increased to a value higher than the highest value reported.
For further references take a look at this metalink note:
Memory Notification: Library Cache Object Loaded Into Sga
Doc ID: Note:330239.1
~ Madrid
http://hrivera99.blogspot.com/ -
How to monitor heap size used in OPP in order to protect Out of Memory
My objective is to know how much heap size currently use so I can handle or do something before user got error report.
The following sql statement just determine what the heap size per OPP process is currently setting:
select DEVELOPER_PARAMETERS from FND_CP_SERVICES
where SERVICE_ID = (select MANAGER_TYPE from FND_CONCURRENT_QUEUES
where CONCURRENT_QUEUE_NAME = 'FNDCPOPP');
Now OPP heap size is set to 1.5G.
ThanksHi Sam,
Please review the following note, as it might help you!!!
Tuning Output Post Processor (OPP) to Improve Performance (Doc ID 1399454.1)
R12: How to Configure the Account Analysis Report for Large Reports (Doc ID 737311.1)
Thanks &
Best Regards, -
What is the best way to verify default heap size in Java
Hi All,
What is the best way to verify default heap size in Java ? does it vary over JVM to JVM . I was reading this article http://javarevisited.blogspot.sg/2011/05/java-heap-space-memory-size-jvm.html , and it says default size is 128 MB but When I run following code :
public static void main(String args[]) {
int MB = 1024*1024;
System.out.println(Runtime.getRuntime().totalMemory()/MB);
It print "870" i.e. 870 MB.
I am bit confused, what is the best way to verify default heap size in any JVM ?
Edited by: 938864 on Jun 5, 2012 11:16 PM938864 wrote:
Hi Kayaman,
Sorry but I don't agree with you on verification part, Why not I can verify it ? to me default means value when I don't specify -Xms and -Xmx and by the way I was testing that program on 32 bit JRE 1.6 on Windows. I am also curious significant difference between 128MB and 870MB I saw, do you see anything obviously wrong ?That spec is outdated. Since Java 6 update 18 (Sun/Oracle implementation) the default maximum heap space is calculated based on total memory availability, but never more than 1GB on 32 bits JVMs / client VMs. On a 64 bits server VM the default can go as high as 32gb.
The best way to verify ANYTHING is to address multiple sources of information and especially those produced by the source, not some page you find on the big bad internet. Even wikipedia is a whole lot better than any random internet site IMO. That's common sense, I can't believe you put much thought into it that you have to ask in a forum. -
Any way to increase the default Heap size for all Java VMs in Solaris 8
Hello,
I have a java product that deals with large databases under Solaris 8. It is a jar file, started by a cron job every night. Some nights it will fail because it runs out of Heap memory depending on the amount of records it has to deal with. I know that I could increase the java VM heap size with "java -jar -mx YY JARFILE" command but I have other java products that are showing the same behavior, and I would like to correct them all in one shot if possible.
What I would like to do is find a system or configuration parameter that forces all Java VMs to use a larger MAX Heap size than the default 16M specified in the Man page for Java. Is there a way to accomplish that?
TIA
MaizoYou could always download the source and modify it.
-
JVM heap size limit under Windows
Hi,
I'm looking either for some help with a workaround, or
confirmation that the information I've found is still the case for the
current state of Java.
Development machine is Win XP Pro, 2G RAM.
Biggest heap I can allocate is about 1.6G, and that is not large enough for this
app.
I have a Swing application that
1) must run on Win XP, 32 bit
2) must implement an editor (similar to Excel but with fewer features) to handle large csv files
( up to about 800Mb).
3) Strong preference for Java 5, though higher could conceivably be supported.
Research so far tells me that this is the result of process memory limitations
of Windows and the JVM, and that I might be able to squeeze a little more heap with
Windows' rebase command, but probably not enough and I would start running the
risk of conflicts with other applications on my users' systems. Ugh.
Also I read of the Windows /3GB switch, but posts say that the JDK's available are not
built to be able to use that feature. I havent had a chance to add memory to
test that yet. However, I'm also under the impression that I should be able to
allocate a heap larger than physical RAM ... except for that process size limit.
So ... my information is basically that I'm stuck with a limit of about 1.6G for
heap size, regardless of the RAM on my computer.
Can anyone confirm whether that is still correct, preferably with a pointer to some
official reference ?
Or better yet, point me toward a workaround?
Thanks!
-tom>
Some bookmarks I have on this topic.
http://sinewalker.wordpress.com/2007/03/04/32-bit-windows-and-jvm-virtual-memory-limit/
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/171205/java-maximum-memory-on-windows-xp
The first link pulled together what I found in lots of bits and pieces elsewhere, nice to have a coherent summary :)
The second link offered a bit of insight into the jvm that I hadn't seen yet .
Thanks!
Maybe you are looking for
-
I'm not completely tech savvy, but I'm having troubles with my external memory & time machine. I'm a student, and thus its very important to me to be able to back up my computer. I wanted to back up my Time Machine the other day. I clicked the icon
-
On both the listing of gmails and the size of the font when gmails are opened, the font size is smaller than prior to upgrading to Firefox 4. I did not change any settings. I cannot see where I can change this back to larger fonts. Help?
-
I downloaded the files for windows 64bit and unzipped them. When I double clicked on the setup.exe all it did was flash the command prompt and that was it. Any ideas? Thanks
-
AE stabilizing, with script - automation - ?
hello i have a question to the stabilizing option in ae... i´m looking for some kind of automation for a filmproject...evrything is shot to zoom in 8%. is it possible to zoom in 8% and stabilize whats automaticly possible? i know this is not the way
-
Privacy/glare protector for MBA screen?
Hi, Has anyone found an add-on privacy/anti-glare filter that fits the MBA screen? I know that there are lots of 13.3" offerings from companies like 3M, but I'm concerned that the MBA's form factor doesn't leave enough space to close the computer wit