Once we got the prototype running, we naturally decided to profile the data memory footprint after it had been parsed and loaded from disk. The unsatisfactory initial results, however, prompted me to search for explanations.
Note: You can download this article's source code from Resources.
Since Java purposefully hides many aspects of memory management, discovering how much memory your objects consume takes some
work. You could use the Runtime.freeMemory() method to measure heap size differences before and after several objects have been allocated. Several articles, such as Ramchander
Varadarajan's "Question of the Week No. 107" (Sun Microsystems, September 2000) and Tony Sintes's "Memory Matters" (JavaWorld, December 2001), detail that idea. Unfortunately, the former article's solution fails because the implementation employs a
wrong Runtime method, while the latter article's solution has its own imperfections:
Runtime.freeMemory() proves insufficient because a JVM may decide to increase its current heap size at any time (especially when it runs garbage
collection). Unless the total heap size is already at the -Xmx maximum size, we should use Runtime.totalMemory()-Runtime.freeMemory() as the used heap size.
Runtime.gc() call may not prove sufficiently aggressive for requesting garbage collection. We could, for example, request object finalizers
to run as well. And since Runtime.gc() is not documented to block until collection completes, it is a good idea to wait until the perceived heap size stabilizes.
Considering those problems, I present Sizeof, a tool with which I snoop at various Java core and application classes:
public class Sizeof
{
public static void main (String [] args) throws Exception
{
// Warm up all classes/methods we will use
runGC ();
usedMemory ();
// Array to keep strong references to allocated objects
final int count = 100000;
Object [] objects = new Object [count];
long heap1 = 0;
// Allocate count+1 objects, discard the first one
for (int i = -1; i < count; ++ i)
{
Object object = null;
// Instantiate your data here and assign it to object
object = new Object ();
//object = new Integer (i);
//object = new Long (i);
//object = new String ();
//object = new byte [128][1]
if (i >= 0)
objects [i] = object;
else
{
object = null; // Discard the warm up object
runGC ();
heap1 = usedMemory (); // Take a before heap snapshot
}
}
runGC ();
long heap2 = usedMemory (); // Take an after heap snapshot:
final int size = Math.round (((float)(heap2 - heap1))/count);
System.out.println ("'before' heap: " + heap1 +
", 'after' heap: " + heap2);
System.out.println ("heap delta: " + (heap2 - heap1) +
", {" + objects [0].getClass () + "} size = " + size + " bytes");
for (int i = 0; i < count; ++ i) objects [i] = null;
objects = null;
}
private static void runGC () throws Exception
{
// It helps to call Runtime.gc()
// using several method calls:
for (int r = 0; r < 4; ++ r) _runGC ();
}
private static void _runGC () throws Exception
{
long usedMem1 = usedMemory (), usedMem2 = Long.MAX_VALUE;
for (int i = 0; (usedMem1 < usedMem2) && (i < 500); ++ i)
{
s_runtime.runFinalization ();
s_runtime.gc ();
Thread.currentThread ().yield ();
usedMem2 = usedMem1;
usedMem1 = usedMemory ();
}
}
private static long usedMemory ()
{
return s_runtime.totalMemory () - s_runtime.freeMemory ();
}
private static final Runtime s_runtime = Runtime.getRuntime ();
} // End of class
Sizeof's key methods are runGC() and usedMemory(). I use a runGC() wrapper method to call _runGC() several times because it appears to make the method more aggressive. (I am not sure why, but it's possible creating and destroying
a method call-stack frame causes a change in the reachability root set and prompts the garbage collector to work harder. Moreover,
consuming a large fraction of the heap space to create enough work for the garbage collector to kick in also helps. In general,
it is hard to ensure everything is collected. The exact details depend on the JVM and garbage collection algorithm.)
Re: Use profiler instead!By Anonymous on December 19, 2009, 10:06 amI'm in a situation, when I need to guess size of my objects at Runtime. Consider application, that for a sake of performance, needs to use as much memory as...
Reply | Read entire comment
HashSetBy Anonymous on December 2, 2009, 5:14 pmm_strings can probably be a HashSet instead.
Reply | Read entire comment
Use profiler instead!By Anonymous on November 27, 2009, 5:28 amWhy dont just use a profiler. They give you a much more precise information
Reply | Read entire comment
Cool stuffBy Anonymous on September 11, 2009, 12:36 amCool stuff
Reply | Read entire comment
View all comments