Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jackrabbit-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 42876 invoked from network); 6 Oct 2010 13:22:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 6 Oct 2010 13:22:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 47609 invoked by uid 500); 6 Oct 2010 13:22:58 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-jackrabbit-dev-archive@jackrabbit.apache.org Received: (qmail 47323 invoked by uid 500); 6 Oct 2010 13:22:55 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@jackrabbit.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@jackrabbit.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@jackrabbit.apache.org Received: (qmail 47291 invoked by uid 99); 6 Oct 2010 13:22:54 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 06 Oct 2010 13:22:54 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2000.0 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [140.211.11.22] (HELO thor.apache.org) (140.211.11.22) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 06 Oct 2010 13:22:54 +0000 Received: from thor (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by thor.apache.org (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o96DMXUT005983 for ; Wed, 6 Oct 2010 13:22:34 GMT Message-ID: <27729799.6301286371353647.JavaMail.jira@thor> Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2010 09:22:33 -0400 (EDT) From: "Jukka Zitting (JIRA)" To: dev@jackrabbit.apache.org Subject: [jira] Commented: (JCR-2770) Initial size of ConcurrentCache depends on number of segments (available processors) In-Reply-To: <7836548.5031286365830650.JavaMail.jira@thor> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-2770?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12918509#action_12918509 ] Jukka Zitting commented on JCR-2770: ------------------------------------ > What is the reason that you set the initial size to 1024? The three-argument constructor (that's needed to enable LRU behaviour) requires some value there, and since there's no public constant for the default value I simply selected something that seemed reasonable. I chose a high value since I expected most practical cases to in any case use pretty large caches, and since environments with lots of processors would typically also have lots of available memory. I of course forgot to consider the fixed memory limits we specify for our test runs. Essentially I just picked the value from my proverbial hat, so it's fine to change it to something different, especially if doing so helps prevent problems! > Initial size of ConcurrentCache depends on number of segments (available processors) > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Key: JCR-2770 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-2770 > Project: Jackrabbit Content Repository > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: jackrabbit-core > Reporter: Marcel Reutegger > Priority: Minor > Fix For: 2.2.0 > > Attachments: JCR-2770.patch > > > This causes a build failure on my machine. Tests run into an OOME because the initial memory footprint of a ConcurrentCache on my machine is 8k. Many of the tests keep references to some kind of repository objects (node, session, x-manager), which means ConcurrentCache instances cannot be garbage collected immediately after a test run. > I think the overall initial size of the cache should be independent of the number of segments. See proposed patch. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.