On Thu, 4 May 2023 09:33:49 GMT, Stefan Karlsson wrote:
> When running jstat tests like the following:
> test/jdk/sun/tools/jstatd/TestJstatdServer.java
>
> with Generational ZGC we get a failure because the O (old generation
> percentage) is reported as `-` and not a number. The reason why it
On Thu, 4 May 2023 09:33:49 GMT, Stefan Karlsson wrote:
> When running jstat tests like the following:
> test/jdk/sun/tools/jstatd/TestJstatdServer.java
>
> with Generational ZGC we get a failure because the O (old generation
> percentage) is reported as `-` and not a number. The reason why it
On Thu, 4 May 2023 09:52:25 GMT, Thomas Schatzl wrote:
> Is it possible to remove the G1 hack in this change too? Because since now a
> zero value is supported in the output, there does not seem to be a reason to
> keep it for G1.
I prefer if that is done and tested as a separate PR.
On Thu, 4 May 2023 09:33:49 GMT, Stefan Karlsson wrote:
> When running jstat tests like the following:
> test/jdk/sun/tools/jstatd/TestJstatdServer.java
>
> with Generational ZGC we get a failure because the O (old generation
> percentage) is reported as `-` and not a number. The reason why it
On Thu, 4 May 2023 09:33:49 GMT, Stefan Karlsson wrote:
> When running jstat tests like the following:
> test/jdk/sun/tools/jstatd/TestJstatdServer.java
>
> with Generational ZGC we get a failure because the O (old generation
> percentage) is reported as `-` and not a number. The reason why it
When running jstat tests like the following:
test/jdk/sun/tools/jstatd/TestJstatdServer.java
with Generational ZGC we get a failure because the O (old generation
percentage) is reported as `-` and not a number. The reason why it is reported
as `-` is that the current capacity of the old generati
