Growing GC Young Gen Times

Jon Masamitsu jon.masamitsu at
Thu May 13 22:29:33 UTC 2010


To amplify on Ramki's comment, the allocations out of the
old generation are always from a free list.  During a young
generation collection each GC thread will get its own
local free lists from the old generation so that it can
copy objects to the old generation without synchronizing
with the other GC thread (most of the time).  Objects from
a GC thread's local free lists are pushed to the globals lists
after the collection (as far as I recall). So there is some
churn in the free lists.


On 05/13/10 14:52, Y. Srinivas Ramakrishna wrote:
> On 05/13/10 10:50, Matt Fowles wrote:
>> Jon~
>> This may sound naive, but how can fragmentation be an issue if the old
>> gen has never been collected?  I would think we are still in the space
>> where we can just bump the old gen alloc pointer...
> Matt, The old gen allocator may fragment the space. Allocation is not 
> exactly "bump a pointer".
> -- ramki
>> Matt
>> On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 12:23 PM, Jon Masamitsu
>> <jon.masamitsu at> wrote:
>>> Matt,
>>> As Ramki indicated fragmentation might be an issue.  As the 
>>> fragmentation
>>> in the old generation increases, it takes longer to find space in 
>>> the old
>>> generation
>>> into which to promote objects from the young generation.  This is 
>>> apparently
>>> not
>>> the problem that Wayne is having but you still might be hitting it.  
>>> If you
>>> can
>>> connect jconsole to the VM and force a full GC, that would tell us 
>>> if it's
>>> fragmentation.
>>> There might be a scaling issue with the UseParNewGC.  If you can use
>>> -XX:-UseParNewGC (turning off the parallel young
>>> generation collection) with  -XX:+UseConcMarkSweepGC the pauses
>>> will be longer but may be more stable.  That's not the solution but 
>>> just
>>> part
>>> of the investigation.
>>> You could try just -XX:+UseParNewGC without -XX:+UseConcMarkSweepGC
>>> and if you don't see the growing young generation pause, that would 
>>> indicate
>>> something specific about promotion into the CMS generation.
>>> UseParallelGC is different from UseParNewGC in a number of ways
>>> and if you try UseParallelGC and still see the growing young generation
>>> pauses, I'd suspect something special about your application.
>>> If you can run these experiments hopefully they will tell
>>> us where to look next.
>>> Jon
>>> On 05/12/10 15:19, Matt Fowles wrote:
>>> All~
>>> I have a large app that produces ~4g of garbage every 30 seconds and
>>> am trying to reduce the size of gc outliers.  About 99% of this data
>>> is garbage, but almost anything that survives one collection survives
>>> for an indeterminately long amount of time.  We are currently using
>>> the following VM and options:
>>> java version "1.6.0_20"
>>> Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.6.0_20-b02)
>>> Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 16.3-b01, mixed mode)
>>>                -verbose:gc
>>>                -XX:+PrintGCTimeStamps
>>>                -XX:+PrintGCDetails
>>>                -XX:+PrintGCTaskTimeStamps
>>>                -XX:+PrintTenuringDistribution
>>>                -XX:+PrintCommandLineFlags
>>>                -XX:+PrintReferenceGC
>>>                -Xms32g -Xmx32g -Xmn4g
>>>                -XX:+UseParNewGC
>>>                -XX:ParallelGCThreads=4
>>>                -XX:+UseConcMarkSweepGC
>>>                -XX:ParallelCMSThreads=4
>>>                -XX:CMSInitiatingOccupancyFraction=60
>>>                -XX:+UseCMSInitiatingOccupancyOnly
>>>                -XX:+CMSParallelRemarkEnabled
>>>                -XX:MaxGCPauseMillis=50
>>>                -Xloggc:gc.log
>>> As you can see from the GC log, we never actually reach the point
>>> where the CMS kicks in (after app startup).  But our young gens seem
>>> to take increasingly long to collect as time goes by.
>>> The steady state of the app is reached around 956.392 into the log
>>> with a collection that takes 0.106 seconds.  Thereafter the survivor
>>> space remains roughly constantly as filled and the amount promoted to
>>> old gen also remains constant, but the collection times increase to
>>> 2.855 seconds by the end of the 3.5 hour run.
>>> Has anyone seen this sort of behavior before?  Are there more switches
>>> that I should try running with?
>>> Obviously, I am working to profile the app and reduce the garbage load
>>> in parallel.  But if I still see this sort of problem, it is only a
>>> question of how long must the app run before I see unacceptable
>>> latency spikes.
>>> Matt
>>> ________________________________
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> hotspot-gc-use mailing list
>>> hotspot-gc-use at
>> _______________________________________________
>> hotspot-gc-use mailing list
>> hotspot-gc-use at
hotspot-gc-use mailing list
hotspot-gc-use at

More information about the hotspot-gc-dev mailing list