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

OutOfMemoryError running travis-core specs on jruby-head #2266

Closed
headius opened this issue Dec 2, 2014 · 4 comments
Closed

OutOfMemoryError running travis-core specs on jruby-head #2266

headius opened this issue Dec 2, 2014 · 4 comments

Comments

@headius
Copy link
Member

@headius headius commented Dec 2, 2014

https://travis-ci.org/travis-ci/travis-core/jobs/42781011

Does look like a valid OOM. I have not invesstigated further.

@headius
Copy link
Member Author

@headius headius commented Dec 3, 2014

(Cross-posted from travis-ci/travis-ci#2999)

Running tests locally to explore this myself...

JRuby 1.7.16 uses upwards of 500MB with default command line where JRuby 9000 used around 750MB but still did complete on my system (Java 8u40). When I gave them each 2GB max heap size, 1.7.16 went as high as 1.05GB and 9k went to 1.28GB, both holding steady once they reached their peaks.

I think it's safe to say two things:

  1. For this suite (travis-core) you probably want to bump up the maximum heap to at least 1GB. I'm not sure what all is being retained, but it's a lot in both cases.
  2. Based on the base and peak numbers, it looks like 9k is in both cases retaining about 250MB more data for some purpose. I won't speculate until I look at a heap dump.

FWIW, on my system 9k was able to run travis-core's suite in 121s (versus 1.7's 100s) and has 5 failures. So, we've got some good opportunities here and we're already pretty close to 1.7.

@headius
Copy link
Member Author

@headius headius commented Dec 3, 2014

I have filed #2270 to track a big memory-retention suspect. This bug will remain open to track the overall heap size difference from 1.7 until we're satisfied we've tidied up.

@enebo
Copy link
Member

@enebo enebo commented Dec 3, 2014

If I had to speculate we are retaining AST and IR data in 9k. So AST probably is getting captured somewhere and ending up pinned.

@enebo enebo removed this from the JRuby 9.0.0.0 milestone Jul 14, 2015
@enebo enebo removed this from the JRuby 9.0.0.0 milestone Jul 14, 2015
@kares
Copy link
Member

@kares kares commented Jun 22, 2017

no longer relevant ... just like #2270 right?

@kares kares added this to the Non-Release milestone Mar 1, 2018
@kares kares closed this as completed Mar 1, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants