GC leaks debugging
Sat Apr 2 00:27:00 GMT 2011
> -----Original Message-----
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org Andrew Haley
> Sent: Friday, April 01, 2011 2:34 AM
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: Re: GC leaks debugging
> On 04/01/2011 10:02 AM, Erik Groeneveld wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 10:45, Andrew Haley <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> >> On 01/04/11 09:39, Erik Groeneveld wrote:
> >>> From reading about the
> >>> GC, I understand that the GC knows what is a pointer and what not
> >>> because there is type information associated with the Java objects.
> >>> So I'd expect no black-listing at all. It that a right
> >> No. Objects are scanned precisely, but the stack is not.
> > Thanks. I think I can rule the stack out by reviewing/adapting my
> > test program. I'll do that first.
> >> Also, depending
> >> on your compilation options, the data segments of your program may
> >> scanned conservatively.
> > I have to think about this one. Which options are you thinking of?
> With that option, everything except the stack is scanned precisely.
> there is some runtime overhead.
Note that in the information you posted, the GC was scanning around 7.5MB of roots conservatively. It might be worth checking what those regions are.
The number of black-listed pages seems really high to me. Is the collector configured for too small a heap?
What's the platform?
More information about the Java