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.

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

Specify the default max memory for surefire. #71

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Aug 31, 2017

Conversation

jtnord
Copy link
Member

@jtnord jtnord commented Jul 3, 2017

By default the max memory used by surefire will depend on the system.
This however has several issues, on a machine with lots of RAM but not a
huge amount spare each surefire JVM may by default try and grab 2GB of
ram, causing (when concurrency > 1 is used) the build to run out of
memory.
756MB was chosed as it is a multple of 256MB and was enough for a large
complex project with lots of JenkinsRule type tests.

@reviewbybees

By default the max memory used by surefire will depend on the system.
this however has several issues, on a machine with lots of RAM but not a
huge amount spare each surefire JVM may by default try and grab 2GB of
ram, causing (when concurrency > 1 is used) the build to run out of
memory.
756MB was chosed as it is a multple of 256MB and was enough for a large
complex project with lots of JenkinsRule type tests.
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Jul 3, 2017

This pull request originates from a CloudBees employee. At CloudBees, we require that all pull requests be reviewed by other CloudBees employees before we seek to have the change accepted. If you want to learn more about our process please see this explanation.

@jglick
Copy link
Member

jglick commented Jul 3, 2017

756MB was chosed as it is a multple of 256MB

Uh, did you mean 768?

Copy link
Member

@batmat batmat left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🐝 good idea to not let ergonomics chime in and hardcode this to avoid flakiness.

Copy link
Member

@oleg-nenashev oleg-nenashev left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM 🐝 and @reviewbybees done

@oleg-nenashev
Copy link
Member

But yeah, 768 would be something more expected. Does not really matter

@oleg-nenashev oleg-nenashev merged commit 674c96d into jenkinsci:master Aug 31, 2017
@jtnord jtnord deleted the argLine branch September 25, 2017 17:45
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants