在准备Java垃圾收集器和内存分配策略课件的过程中,看到Parallel Scavenge收集器与Serial收集器在Survivor区的使用策略还是有很大不同。本文对看到的Parallel Scavenge收集器的运行现象进行笔记。
本人开发环境的JVM版本信息如下:
>java -version
java version "1.8.0_101"
Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_101-b13)
Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.101-b13, mixed mode)
测试代码如下:
private static final int _1MB = 1024 * 1024;
/*
* VM参数:-verbose:gc -Xms20M -Xmx20M -Xmn10M -XX:+PrintGCDetails -XX:SurvivorRatio=8
*/
public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
byte[] alloc1, alloc2, alloc3, alloc4;
alloc1 = new byte[_1MB / 4];
System.out.println("alloc1 " + printAddressOf(alloc1));
alloc2 = new byte[3 * _1MB];
System.out.println("alloc2 " + printAddressOf(alloc2));
alloc3 = new byte[3 * _1MB];
System.out.println("alloc3 " + printAddressOf(alloc3));
alloc4 = new byte[3 * _1MB];
System.out.println("alloc4 " + printAddressOf(alloc4));
System.out.println();
System.out.println("alloc1 " + printAddressOf(alloc1));
System.out.println("alloc2 " + printAddressOf(alloc2));
System.out.println("alloc3 " + printAddressOf(alloc3));
System.out.println("alloc4 " + printAddressOf(alloc4));
}
printAddressOf是一个简单的获取对象在内存的地址的方法。
用VM参数-verbose:gc -Xms20M -Xmx20M -Xmn10M -XX:+PrintGCDetails -XX:SurvivorRatio=8运行上述代码,在控制台得到的输出如下:
alloc1 0x00000000ff6f6158
alloc2 0x00000000ff788b30
alloc3 0x00000000ffa88b40
[GC (Allocation Failure) [PSYoungGen: 7714K->1016K(9216K)] 7714K->7176K(19456K), 0.0038298 secs] [Times: user=0.00 sys=0.00, real=0.00 secs]
[Full GC (Ergonomics) [PSYoungGen: 1016K->0K(9216K)] [ParOldGen: 6160K->7101K(10240K)] 7176K->7101K(19456K), [Metaspace: 3444K->3444K(1056768K)], 0.0068693 secs] [Times: user=0.00 sys=0.00, real=0.01 secs]
alloc4 0x00000000ff600000
alloc1 0x00000000ff219e10
alloc2 0x00000000fec012f8
alloc3 0x00000000fef01308
alloc4 0x00000000ff600000
Heap
PSYoungGen total 9216K, used 3314K [0x00000000ff600000, 0x0000000100000000, 0x0000000100000000)
eden space 8192K, 40% used [0x00000000ff600000,0x00000000ff93caa0,0x00000000ffe00000)
from space 1024K, 0% used [0x00000000ffe00000,0x00000000ffe00000,0x00000000fff00000)
to space 1024K, 0% used [0x00000000fff00000,0x00000000fff00000,0x0000000100000000)
ParOldGen total 10240K, used 7101K [0x00000000fec00000, 0x00000000ff600000, 0x00000000ff600000)
object space 10240K, 69% used [0x00000000fec00000,0x00000000ff2ef588,0x00000000ff600000)
Metaspace used 3451K, capacity 4564K, committed 4864K, reserved 1056768K
class space used 385K, capacity 388K, committed 512K, reserved 1048576K
从上面的内容可以看出:
- 在GC和Full GC后,alloc1不在Survivor区,而是进入了老年代
- GC后,PSYoungGen的区域已使用量变为1016K,在Full GC才变为0K
- alloc1最后的内存地址比alloc2,alloc3要高,如果alloc1和alloc2、alloc3是同时被移动到老年代的,alloc1的内存地址更可能比后面两个对象要低,说明alloc1晚于alloc2,alloc3被移动到老年代
private static final int _1MB = 1024 * 1024;
/*
* VM参数:-verbose:gc -Xms20M -Xmx20M -Xmn10M -XX:+PrintGCDetails -XX:SurvivorRatio=8
*/
public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
byte[] alloc1, alloc2, alloc3, alloc4;
alloc1 = new byte[_1MB / 4];
System.out.println("alloc1 " + printAddressOf(alloc1));
alloc2 = new byte[3 * _1MB];
System.out.println("alloc2 " + printAddressOf(alloc2));
alloc3 = new byte[3 * _1MB];
System.out.println("alloc3 " + printAddressOf(alloc3));
alloc3 = null;
alloc4 = new byte[3 * _1MB];
System.out.println("alloc4 " + printAddressOf(alloc4));
System.out.println();
System.out.println("alloc1 " + printAddressOf(alloc1));
System.out.println("alloc2 " + printAddressOf(alloc2));
// System.out.println("alloc3 " + printAddressOf(alloc3));
System.out.println("alloc4 " + printAddressOf(alloc4));
}
用同样的VM参数运行,在控制台得到的输出如下:
alloc1 0x00000000ff6f6158
alloc2 0x00000000ff788b30
alloc3 0x00000000ffa88b40
[GC (Allocation Failure) [PSYoungGen: 7714K->1016K(9216K)] 7714K->4112K(19456K), 0.0024849 secs] [Times: user=0.00 sys=0.00, real=0.00 secs]
alloc4 0x00000000ff600000
alloc1 0x00000000ffe20000
alloc2 0x00000000fec02000
alloc4 0x00000000ff600000
Heap
PSYoungGen total 9216K, used 4330K [0x00000000ff600000, 0x0000000100000000, 0x0000000100000000)
eden space 8192K, 40% used [0x00000000ff600000,0x00000000ff93caa0,0x00000000ffe00000)
from space 1024K, 99% used [0x00000000ffe00000,0x00000000ffefe040,0x00000000fff00000)
to space 1024K, 0% used [0x00000000fff00000,0x00000000fff00000,0x0000000100000000)
ParOldGen total 10240K, used 3096K [0x00000000fec00000, 0x00000000ff600000, 0x00000000ff600000)
object space 10240K, 30% used [0x00000000fec00000,0x00000000fef06010,0x00000000ff600000)
Metaspace used 3451K, capacity 4564K, committed 4864K, reserved 1056768K
class space used 385K, capacity 388K, committed 512K, reserved 1048576K
从上面的内容,可以看出:
- 只发生了一次GC,没有发生Full GC
- 只有alloc2被移动到了老年代,alloc1被移动到了Survivor区,alloc3被直接从eden回收,alloc4分配在了eden上
关于在Parallel Scavenge + Parallel Old模式下,Survivor区地对象进入老年代地算法还没有清楚。我将MaxTenuringThreshold参数设置了不同地值来运行上面地代码,得到地结果没有变化。这里面的详细算法,有待对JVM的源码进行分析后才能揭开其神秘的面纱。