-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.6k
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
maxBatchSize preallocated memory may be thousands of times larger than actual message length #14943
Comments
I have a doubt, How to achieve |
Whether it is possible to loop through the messages to be packaged and add their sizes to accurately calculate the size of the memory to be allocated? |
How about use |
@tjiuming Yes, I think CompositeByteBuf will work which provided a Bytebuf that can be dynamically expanded |
The issue had no activity for 30 days, mark with Stale label. |
The issue had no activity for 30 days, mark with Stale label. |
Is your enhancement request related to a problem? Please describe.
Guys, during the stress test, we found that the client's memory is very large, and even Full gc appeared. After analyzing the dump file, we found that the memory space occupied is much larger than the actual message size, and the serialization of 1KB of messages takes up 1MB.
maxBatchSize = Math.max(maxBatchSize, uncompressedSize);
Debugging found that the maxBatchSize that controls the pre-allocated
ByteBufPair.b2
memory size is stateful. As the size of the largest batch or the largest single message grows, this may cause the pre-allocatedByteBufPair.b2
memory to grow larger and larger , which maybe thousands of times larger than the payload of MessageImpl.Lowering the value of
batchingMaxMessages
may reduce the risk of problems, but a single message that may be too large can also cause problemsDescribe the solution you'd like
It is best to loop through the messages to be packed to accurately calculate the memory size to be allocated
Describe alternatives you've considered
Let the user choose whether to precisely allocate or pre-allocate
Additional context
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: