On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 07:43:41PM +0100, t.n.a. wrote:
: rough measurements). The memory usage seems to grow up to a 100 MB
: (Cayenne accesses a single table of about fifty attributes and a 1000
: rows - don't ask) and sometimes - I can't reproduce the problem now -
: the app brakes when tryin
Hi,
>>>Does anyone have any idea as to why this is happening?
>>>
>
>Try looking at jvmstat
(http://developers.sun.com/dev/coolstuff/jvmstat/)
>
>My own tests with show that its the permanent space of objects that
gets
> filled up and not reclaimed after each reload.
Yup, that's as expected.
Y
call Service LLC.
-Original Message-
From: Shapira, Yoav [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 09, 2004 1:35 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: RE: Memory Usage - Tomcat 5.0.25
Hi,
I have a couple of ideas. One is that your webapp maintain static or
shared references to objects that pr
Users List
Subject: RE: Memory Usage - Tomcat 5.0.25
Hi,
I have a couple of ideas. One is that your webapp maintain static or
shared references to objects that prevent them from being garbage
collected, and therefore memory from returning to the heap. Another is
that a webapp undeploy is not guara
Hi,
I have a couple of ideas. One is that your webapp maintain static or
shared references to objects that prevent them from being garbage
collected, and therefore memory from returning to the heap. Another is
that a webapp undeploy is not guaranteed to reclaim all memory used by
the webapp anyw
Thanks for the information!
"Shapira, Yoav" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
Now you're starting to ask the right questions.
>If System.runFinalization() and System.gc() are misleading... what
should I
>use instead, to force to garbage collection?
You can't force
Thank you for the information!
"James Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> bort wrote:
>
> >If System.runFinalization() and System.gc() are misleading... what should
I
> >use instead, to force to garbage collection?
> >
> >So, the amount of memory the JVM uses, will
Hi,
Great, exactly what I wanted. Thanks,
Yoav Shapira
Millennium Research Informatics
>-Original Message-
>From: James Black [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 2:21 PM
>To: Tomcat Users List
>Subject: Re: Memory Usage
>
>Shapir
Shapira, Yoav wrote:
Hi,
JDK1.5.0beta seems to have an improved garbage collection tuning
built
Care to elaborate or provide a reference? Thanks,
http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/relnotes/features.html#vm_selftune
Based on my own experience, doing various performance related tests
Hi,
> JDK1.5.0beta seems to have an improved garbage collection tuning
built
Care to elaborate or provide a reference? Thanks,
Yoav Shapira
Millennium Research Informatics
This e-mail, including any attachments, is a confidential business communication, and
may contain information that is
bort wrote:
If System.runFinalization() and System.gc() are misleading... what should I
use instead, to force to garbage collection?
So, the amount of memory the JVM uses, will always increase? How do I get
it to decrease?
You can't get it to decrease, but if you have the memory large enough
so
Hi,
Now you're starting to ask the right questions.
>If System.runFinalization() and System.gc() are misleading... what
should I
>use instead, to force to garbage collection?
You can't force garbage collection, and it is terrible design to rely on
particular garbage collection timing. Instead,
If System.runFinalization() and System.gc() are misleading... what should I
use instead, to force to garbage collection?
So, the amount of memory the JVM uses, will always increase? How do I get
it to decrease?
256 was an arbitrary choice. Is there some formula I should be using (based
on proje
Hi,
>We've setup Tomcat to use a max of 256Mb. I've been tracking memory
usage
>using:
>
> System.runFinalization();
> System.gc();
Be aware that the above two lines are misleading, as they are
suggestions and not guaranteed to actually do anything.
>What I've noticed is that the the 'T' v
Scenario 1 will use more memory than scenarion 2.
The ratio depends on the internal architecture of the classes.
(What kind of object they create, where they store it)
If you just look at the core size that is needed to load
the classes it roughly directly proportional to the number
of webapp in
Hi,
>Scenario 1:
>Each application is deployed with the three jars under their respective
>WEB-INF/lib directories.
>
>Scenario 2:
>Nothing is placed in the respective WEB-INF/lib directories. Rather the
>three jars are placed in tomcat's common/lib directory.
>
>Would the memory usage of tomcat
Howdy,
It's normal: the classloader and associated objects can't get recycled
and classes are stored in the permanent area. You can tweak the JVM's
MaxPermSize if you'd like. As you noted, restarting your context all
the time is not a typical production scenario.
Yoav Shapira
Millennium ChemInf
L PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 5:18 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: RE: Memory Usage, Leakage and java.lang.OutofMemory
>
> Once you get an OutOfMemoryError, your JVM is in an
> unpredictable state and must be restarted.
> This is not specific to tomc
Howdy,
Once you get an OutOfMemoryError, your JVM is in an unpredictable state
and must be restarted. This is not specific to tomcat. Reloading the
webapp will not do any good.
Find the leak with a profiler and fix it ;)
Yoav Shapira
Millennium ChemInformatics
>-Original Message-
>Fr
The recently installed Tomcat 4.1.24 on startup takes about 60M of memory.
Is it my configuration. I have not noticed previous versions consuming so
much.
I have 6 or so applications in webapps - mainly struts - documentaion,
examples etc.
Using j2sdk1.4.0.
Regards
-
I use 'ps' to figure it out (are you using linux?)
I do something like:
ps aux | grep tomcat
i grep tomcat because that is the user my tomcat runs
as... you could also use 'top'
__
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com
Hi,
You could turn on verbose garbage collection and it will give you
detailed info on the gc'ing. It will show you how much memory it is
using... like a kinda before the collection and after the collection
reading. This isn't something you want to run in production (for a long
time at least).
Checkout jvmstat on http://developers.sun.com/techtopics/emergingtech/
> -Original Message-
> From: Luc Foisy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 3:19 PM
> To: Tomcat User List (E-mail)
> Subject: Memory usage
>
>
>
> Is there a quick and easy way to figure out th
y problems, it's probably
something else.
Hope this was helpful,
Regards,
Will Hartung
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
- Original Message -
From: "Turoff, Steve" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Will Hartung" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 10:07 AM
Su
From: Will Hartung [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, January 03, 2003 4:54 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re: Memory Usage and Garbage Collection
>
>
> > From: "Brandon Cruz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Friday, January 03, 2003 2:
So the instance, and it's string, can still be GC'd, right?
Nope.
There is still a live reference to each OtherObject instance sitting in
the static HashMap "cache". Therefore, this instance cannot be GC'd, even
though *you* have released your own reference to it. And, if the
OtherObject class
e the outofmemory error.
saurabh
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 01/04/03 01:12AM >>>
On Fri, 3 Jan 2003, Saurabh Arora wrote:
> Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2003 02:33:17 -0700
> From: Saurabh Arora <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Tomcat Users List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> There is still a live reference to each OtherObject instance sitting in
> the static HashMap "cache".
> there is no way to ***ever*** GC this instance
Another example of a similar memory leak is the File.deleteOnExit method.
It should not be used without extreme care and understanding in a serv
> Instead, you'd want to use a single JSP page for each basic *style*
> of output (essentially the JSP page would be a formatting template)
> that pulls in the unique information for a particular report (from
> the database, from XML, or whatever) dynamically.
For example, with the web site for Th
Cruz wrote:
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 16:23:24 -0600
From: Brandon Cruz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Tomcat Users List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Tomcat Users List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: Memory Usage and Garbage Collection
Craig,
From what you ha
On Fri, 3 Jan 2003, Brandon Cruz wrote:
> Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 16:23:24 -0600
> From: Brandon Cruz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Tomcat Users List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: Tomcat Users List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: RE:
> From: "Brandon Cruz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, January 03, 2003 2:23 PM
> Subject: RE: Memory Usage and Garbage Collection
> 1)For every single request to a servlet or JSP page, a new instance of
that
> class is created? For example, if there is one J
nstances created will take up all the available RAM. Is
this correct?
Brandon
-Original Message-
From: Craig R. McClanahan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, January 03, 2003 1:43 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: RE: Memory Usage and Garbage Collection
On Fri, 3 Jan 2003,
Hi Craig,
thank you very much for this complete explanation. That's
perfectly understandable and the GC-behaviour which I had
expected before. I must have understood something wrong in this
thread's discussion, which went on yesterday.
Again, thank you very much for your helpful responses (not
On Fri, 3 Jan 2003, Saurabh Arora wrote:
> Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2003 02:33:17 -0700
> From: Saurabh Arora <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Tomcat Users List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Memory Usage and Garbage Collection
>
> Just
On Fri, 3 Jan 2003, Andreas Probst wrote:
> Hi Craig,
>
> please see intermixed.
>
> On 2 Jan 2003 at 18:18, Craig R. McClanahan wrote:
>
> >
> > Instances can be garbage collected IF AND ONLY IF there are no
> > live references to that object in a static/instance/local
> > variable of some othe
Hi thank you,
your reply calms me down again. I guess I got a bit confused by
the preceding discussion.
Andreas
On 3 Jan 2003 at 8:59, Shapira, Yoav wrote:
> Hi,
> There's clearly some misconceptions on the topic of garbage
> collection ;) These questions come up very often it seems, on
> thi
Hi,
There's clearly some misconceptions on the topic of garbage collection
;) These questions come up very often it seems, on this list and
others.
>Please consider the following service() or doGet() or so of a
>servlet:
>
>public void service(ServletRequest request, ServletResponse
>response)
>
Just wanted to know, does the current implementation of tomcat 4.1.18
also has the same problem of keeping the jsp's
in memory. or it was only present in 4.0.4
saurabh
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 01/03/03 02:26PM >>>
Hi Craig,
please see intermixed.
On 2 Jan 2003 at 18:18, Craig R. McClanahan wrot
Hi Craig,
please see intermixed.
On 2 Jan 2003 at 18:18, Craig R. McClanahan wrote:
>
> Instances can be garbage collected IF AND ONLY IF there are no
> live references to that object in a static/instance/local
> variable of some other object that is also in memory. Only
> instances that are n
On Fri, 3 Jan 2003, Julian Löffelhardt wrote:
> Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 02:01:58 +0100
> From: Julian Löffelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Tomcat Users List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Tomcat Users List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Memory Usage and Garb
On Thu, 2 Jan 2003, Brandon Cruz wrote:
> Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 19:04:55 -0600
> From: Brandon Cruz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Tomcat Users List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Memory Usage and Garbage Collection
>
> Craig,
>
> T
t" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, January 03, 2003 1:12 AM
Subject: Re: Memory Usage and Garbage Collection
>
>
> On Thu, 2 Jan 2003, Brandon Cruz wrote:
>
> > Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 16:16:23 -0600
> > From: Brandon Cruz <[EMAIL PROTE
mcat Users List; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Memory Usage and Garbage Collection
On Thu, 2 Jan 2003, Brandon Cruz wrote:
> Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 16:16:23 -0600
> From: Brandon Cruz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Tomcat Users List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL
On Thu, 2 Jan 2003, Brandon Cruz wrote:
> Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 16:16:23 -0600
> From: Brandon Cruz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Tomcat Users List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: Tomcat Users List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Memory Usage and Garbage Collection
>
> Do lo
t Users List
> Subject: RE: Memory usage?
>
> you using JDBC?
>
> Head of Operations AsiaPac
> elata
> Level 30
> 6 Battery Road
> Singapore
> 049909
> Office : +65 65509723
> Mobile : +65 91117814
> Fax: +65 65509725
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.el
you using JDBC?
Head of Operations AsiaPac
elata
Level 30
6 Battery Road
Singapore
049909
Office : +65 65509723
Mobile : +65 91117814
Fax: +65 65509725
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.elata.com
This e-mail is intended solely for the above mentioned recipient(s) and it
may contain confidential in
Hi,
Good luck ;) Try running tomcat with one webapp at a time, i.e.
un-deploy the others. If they're all running within the same JVM, I
don't know how you'd distinguish them.
Also, be careful to distinguish between top and/or the task manager, and
java's Runtime.totalMemory() and .freeMemory()
t?
Thanks
S
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 08 July 2002 13:26
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: memory usage (longish)
I cannot help you on the real problem, but i think both kinds of error are
the same. The "missing" memory in yo
I cannot help you on the real problem, but i think both kinds of error are
the same. The "missing" memory in your free output seems to be gone into
linux' file system buffers and cache (cache: 1082072, nearly 1GB). So
almost every file on your hard drive most likely has been cached ;-). If
any ot
l 08, 2002 6:55 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re: Memory usage
>
>
> Yaogeng -
>
> That is normal for any java application running on Linux. Just java
> native threads showing up as multiple processes, but its actually mostly
> shared memory. Do a 'top&
Jeff:
Thanks for the replying. The total memory usage of Apache and tomcat is
14464k. Is that normal?
Thanks a lot!
Yaogeng
-Original Message-
From: Jeffrey Bonevich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 6:55 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: Memory usage
Yaogeng -
That is normal for any java application running on Linux. Just java
native threads showing up as multiple processes, but its actually mostly
shared memory. Do a 'top' to confirm.
jeff
Yaogeng Cheng wrote:
> Hi:
>
> I am using TomCat version 3.2.1 in Linux, and I found there are
bage collector cleans up the
> object.
> -Jamey
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Jurrius, Mark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2001 7:43 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Memory usage
>
> Correct me if I'm wrong. If for instance I
I
found this behaviour on Linux was cured by using hotspot. I don't know how to
use hotspot under windows, but I think its a seperate executable (in the
JDK)
-Original Message-From: Garry De Toffoli
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: 03 May 2001 13:34To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject
tney, James [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2001 11:35 AM
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: RE: Memory usage
>
>
> Actually, setting a Java object to null (assuming that there are no other
> references to th
place?
Mark
-Original Message-
From: William Kaufman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2001 10:07 AM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: Memory usage
> That your finalize method is called, doesn't mean that
> the garbage collector has
-- Bill K.
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Jurrius, Mark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2001 7:43 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: RE: Memory usage
> >
> >
> > Correct me if I'
ilto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2001 10:07 AM
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject:RE: Memory usage
>
> > That your finalize method is called, doesn't mean that
> > the garbage collector has released your objects. The
> > only way to
May 03, 2001 7:43 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Memory usage
>
>
> Correct me if I'm wrong. If for instance I want a bean
> removed knowing that
> System.gc() does not happen immediately, would setting the
> bean equal to
> null force the bean to
GC will probably not happen but, this
is
vm implementation dependant ... so maybe it will :) depends on the vendor.
> -Original Message-
> From: Jurrius, Mark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2001 11:43 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Mem
Mark
-Original Message-
From: William Kaufman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2001 10:07 AM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: Memory usage
> That your finalize method is called, doesn't mean that
> the garbage collector has released your o
Hei,
i had the the error with Tomcat 3.2.2b2 and I've started the VM with
-verbose:gc,
so it shows me if the Garbage Collector will work.
his Work was Ok, but doesn't release the memory.
I have change ther Version of TC to 3.2.2b3 and the memory rising has
stopped, and he gives memory back after
> That your finalize method is called, doesn't mean that
> the garbage collector has released your objects. The
> only way to be shure that this happens, is to explicitly
> run System.gc().
Even that's not sufficient: it just suggests to the VM that
garbage-collecting might be a good idea right
On Thu, 3 May 2001, Garry De Toffoli wrote:
| What do you think about this?
How's the "long run behaviour"? It might be that tomcat is initializing
itself (creates servlets and the like) as you go along, and that after
"some time" things will even out and go up and down just a little...
--
65 matches
Mail list logo
