Re: jmx-dev RFR 8020467: Inconsistency between usage.getUsed() and isUsageThresholdExceeded() with CMS Old Gen pool

2013-10-23 Thread Mandy Chung
On 10/23/2013 7:32 AM, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: I've updated the patch. The GC is called even before the first attempt to get the pool memory usage and System.gc() is used to perform GC (no MXBean checks). This should simplify the change a bit. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jbachorik/8020467/we

Re: jmx-dev RFR 8020467: Inconsistency between usage.getUsed() and isUsageThresholdExceeded() with CMS Old Gen pool

2013-10-23 Thread Bengt Rutisson
Hi again Jaroslav, On 2013-10-23 17:07, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: On 23.10.2013 16:43, Bengt Rutisson wrote: Hi Jaroslav, On 2013-10-23 16:32, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: On 23.10.2013 15:15, Bengt Rutisson wrote: On 2013-10-23 14:55, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: Hi Bengt, On 23.10.2013 14:40,

Re: jmx-dev RFR 8020467: Inconsistency between usage.getUsed() and isUsageThresholdExceeded() with CMS Old Gen pool

2013-10-23 Thread Jaroslav Bachorik
On 23.10.2013 16:43, Bengt Rutisson wrote: Hi Jaroslav, On 2013-10-23 16:32, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: On 23.10.2013 15:15, Bengt Rutisson wrote: On 2013-10-23 14:55, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: Hi Bengt, On 23.10.2013 14:40, Bengt Rutisson wrote: Hi Jaroslav, A couple of questions. I don'

Re: jmx-dev RFR 8020467: Inconsistency between usage.getUsed() and isUsageThresholdExceeded() with CMS Old Gen pool

2013-10-23 Thread Bengt Rutisson
Hi Jaroslav, On 2013-10-23 16:32, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: On 23.10.2013 15:15, Bengt Rutisson wrote: On 2013-10-23 14:55, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: Hi Bengt, On 23.10.2013 14:40, Bengt Rutisson wrote: Hi Jaroslav, A couple of questions. I don't understand why this is a CMS only problem?

Re: jmx-dev RFR 8020467: Inconsistency between usage.getUsed() and isUsageThresholdExceeded() with CMS Old Gen pool

2013-10-23 Thread Jaroslav Bachorik
On 23.10.2013 15:15, Bengt Rutisson wrote: On 2013-10-23 14:55, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: Hi Bengt, On 23.10.2013 14:40, Bengt Rutisson wrote: Hi Jaroslav, A couple of questions. I don't understand why this is a CMS only problem? Why don't the other collectors have the same issue? I guess i

Re: jmx-dev RFR 8020467: Inconsistency between usage.getUsed() and isUsageThresholdExceeded() with CMS Old Gen pool

2013-10-23 Thread Bengt Rutisson
On 2013-10-23 14:55, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: Hi Bengt, On 23.10.2013 14:40, Bengt Rutisson wrote: Hi Jaroslav, A couple of questions. I don't understand why this is a CMS only problem? Why don't the other collectors have the same issue? I guess it is less likely that the other collectors s

Re: jmx-dev RFR 8020467: Inconsistency between usage.getUsed() and isUsageThresholdExceeded() with CMS Old Gen pool

2013-10-23 Thread Jaroslav Bachorik
Hi Bengt, On 23.10.2013 14:40, Bengt Rutisson wrote: Hi Jaroslav, A couple of questions. I don't understand why this is a CMS only problem? Why don't the other collectors have the same issue? I guess it is less likely that the other collectors start (or complete) a GC without a lot of allocat

Re: jmx-dev RFR 8020467: Inconsistency between usage.getUsed() and isUsageThresholdExceeded() with CMS Old Gen pool

2013-10-23 Thread Bengt Rutisson
Hi Jaroslav, A couple of questions. I don't understand why this is a CMS only problem? Why don't the other collectors have the same issue? I guess it is less likely that the other collectors start (or complete) a GC without a lot of allocation going on. But at least G1 should have the same p

Re: jmx-dev RFR 8020467: Inconsistency between usage.getUsed() and isUsageThresholdExceeded() with CMS Old Gen pool

2013-10-23 Thread Staffan Larsen
On 23 okt 2013, at 10:12, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: > On 23.10.2013 10:08, Staffan Larsen wrote: >> I think you can simplify the logic for forcing a GC to just a simple call to >> "System.gc();". AFAIK System.gc() will cause a full collection to happen for >> all collectors. > > Hm, will it n

Re: jmx-dev RFR 8020467: Inconsistency between usage.getUsed() and isUsageThresholdExceeded() with CMS Old Gen pool

2013-10-23 Thread Jaroslav Bachorik
On 23.10.2013 10:08, Staffan Larsen wrote: I think you can simplify the logic for forcing a GC to just a simple call to "System.gc();". AFAIK System.gc() will cause a full collection to happen for all collectors. Hm, will it now? I had the impression that it was just hinting the GC system to

Re: jmx-dev RFR 8020467: Inconsistency between usage.getUsed() and isUsageThresholdExceeded() with CMS Old Gen pool

2013-10-23 Thread Staffan Larsen
I think you can simplify the logic for forcing a GC to just a simple call to "System.gc();". AFAIK System.gc() will cause a full collection to happen for all collectors. /Staffan On 23 okt 2013, at 10:02, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: > On 22.10.2013 22:04, Mandy Chung wrote: >> Hi Jaroslav, >>

Re: jmx-dev RFR 8020467: Inconsistency between usage.getUsed() and isUsageThresholdExceeded() with CMS Old Gen pool

2013-10-23 Thread Jaroslav Bachorik
On 22.10.2013 22:04, Mandy Chung wrote: Hi Jaroslav, On 10/22/13 6:47 AM, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: Please, review the following test fix: Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8020467 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jbachorik/8020467/webrev.01 Have you considered to force GC

Re: jmx-dev RFR 6309226: TEST: java/lang/management/ThreadMXBean/SynchronizationStatistics.java didn't check Thread.sleep

2013-10-23 Thread Jaroslav Bachorik
On 23.10.2013 02:40, David Holmes wrote: On 22/10/2013 9:03 PM, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: On 22.10.2013 09:58, David Holmes wrote: On 21/10/2013 9:55 PM, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: Please, review this small patch for a test failing due to the updated implementation in JDK6. Issue: https://bugs.