-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.6k
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
[GR-52942] Add JFR events and track peak usage for native memory tracking. #8668
Conversation
add peak tracking and tests
5d22ffc
to
580a18d
Compare
@Description("Native memory peak usage for a given memory type in the JVM.") | ||
@Category({"Java Virtual Machine", "Memory"}) | ||
@StackTrace(false) | ||
public class NativeMemoryUsagePeakEvent extends Event { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
All of the other events with the "jdk" prefix have been ported over from OpenJDK. Maybe there should be some way of differentiating these NMT events. If we want to continue using the "jdk" prefix, do you think it would be a good idea to include a note in the event description indicating these events are built-in specific to Native Image?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We've also marked the new events as experimental for now, that's how I would currently look for them. But yes, a short note like (GraalVM Native Image only)
or so in the description sounds reasonable to me.
@Label("Native Memory Usage Total Peak") | ||
@Description("Information about native memory peak usage of committed virtual memory and malloc.") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I initially specified that the peak usage is reported with regard to committed virtual memory + mallocs, since we report both committed and reserved memory in the other NMT events. Do you think it's not necessary? I'm fine leaving out those details if it's already obvious.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we should report both committed and reserved for the Native Image-specific events as well. I will change the code accordingly.
Thank you for working on integrating these changes @christianhaeubl ! |
580a18d
to
d7f9b01
Compare
d7f9b01
to
6ba75fb
Compare
No description provided.