Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Significant increase in memory use switching from 9.0.1.0 to 9.1.0.0-SNAPSHOT #3690

Closed
donv opened this issue Feb 21, 2016 · 5 comments
Closed

Significant increase in memory use switching from 9.0.1.0 to 9.1.0.0-SNAPSHOT #3690

donv opened this issue Feb 21, 2016 · 5 comments
Labels
application performance Rails regression
Milestone
Invalid or Duplicate

Comments

@donv
Copy link
Member

donv commented Feb 21, 2016

jruby 9.0.1.0 (2.2.2) 2015-09-02 583f336 Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM 25.72-b15 on 1.8.0_72-b15 +jit [linux-amd64]

jruby 9.1.0.0-SNAPSHOT (2.2.3) 2016-02-17 482c35a Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM 25.72-b15 on 1.8.0_72-b15 +jit [linux-amd64]

CentOS release 5.11 (Final)
Linux 2.6.18-406.el5 #1 SMP Tue Jun 2 17:25:57 EDT 2015 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux

Full Rails 4.2.5.1 environment with lots of gems :)

When switching from 9.0.1.0 to 9.1.0.0-SNAPSHOT memory use increases by about 20%.

I would expect memory use to be about the same as with JRuby 9.0.x. Give me a hint of how to profile and give more information.
@enebo
Copy link
Member

enebo commented Feb 22, 2016

@donv you could use jvisualvm to figure out what there happens to be more of. I would guess most likely it is org.jruby.ir.* types. comparing heaps from both versions will help.

We do have a plan to be able to share instrs coming at some point in the future which should help on memory but I don't actually know why we are using more memory than in 9.0.0.0.

@donv
Copy link
Member Author

donv commented Feb 23, 2016

Will do a heap dump and compare.

@kares
Copy link
Member

kares commented Jun 23, 2017

believe this has been resolved by subsequent 9.1 releases ... @donv could you confirm please?

@headius
Copy link
Member

headius commented Jun 23, 2017

There have been a number of memory improvements since 9.1 that could easily explain this, like the excessive creation of method handles or the infinite chaining of constant caches.

@donv
Copy link
Member Author

donv commented Aug 3, 2017

Sorry for the late reply. I think this issue is resolved.

@kares kares closed this as completed Aug 3, 2017
@kares kares added this to the Invalid or Duplicate milestone Aug 3, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
application performance Rails regression
Projects
None yet
Milestone
Invalid or Duplicate
Development

No branches or pull requests
4 participants
@headius @enebo @kares @donv