RFR: 8335126: Shenandoah: Improve OOM handling
William Kemper
wkemper at openjdk.org
Thu Jun 27 18:32:22 UTC 2024
On Wed, 26 Jun 2024 17:51:36 GMT, Kelvin Nilsen <kdnilsen at openjdk.org> wrote:
> 1. Throw OOM after failed allocation request following a Full GC (rather
> than retrying as long as Full GC makes good progress because
> repeatedly retrying the allocation request creates brown-out behavior
> with no identified benefits on real-world workloads)
>
> 2. Count a successful allocation following a blocking
> handle_allocation_failure() request to be good GC progress.
> Otherwise, we increment gc_no_progress_count in full GCs that
> have bad progress but successful allocations, and this causes
> unwanted failure to even try a full GC in a different thread after
> an out-of-memory condition might have been resolved in this thread.
>
> 3. Count a completed concurrent GC cycle as good progress, regardless
> of how much memory it might have been able to reclaim. The fact that
> concurrent GC succeeded without allocation failure and without
> degeneration is considered good progress. Successful concurrent
> GCs between Full GCs will reset the gc_no_progress_count to zero.
>
> 4. Do not count degenerated cycles as having no-progress. If a
> degenerated cycle has no progress, it will upgrade to full GC.
> The upgraded full GC will evaluate its own progress. We don't
> want to count this "same [upgraded] cycle" twice.
>
> These changes have been tested over a variety of workloads and standard tests. These changes have also been tested with the generational mode of Shenandoah. It appears these changes provide more robust and consistent handling across a diversity of scenarios than the original implementation.
Marked as reviewed by wkemper (Committer).
-------------
PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19912#pullrequestreview-2146215417
More information about the hotspot-gc-dev
mailing list