What are common mistakes developers make with G1 garbage collector?

The G1 garbage collector (Garbage First) is designed for applications with large heaps, but developers often encounter common pitfalls that can affect performance. Here are some mistakes to watch out for:

  • Incorrect Heap Sizing: Not setting the initial and maximum heap size appropriately can lead to suboptimal performance.
  • Neglecting to Monitor GC Logs: Failing to analyze garbage collection logs can result in missing crucial performance issues.
  • Improper Tuning Parameters: Using default settings without tuning (like `-XX:MaxGCPauseMillis`) can lead to long garbage collection pauses.
  • Ignoring Old Generation Behaviour: Not understanding how to manage objects in the Old Generation can lead to frequent Full GCs.
  • Not Using JVM Flags for G1: Developers often overlook JVM flags that can optimize G1 performance.

By being aware of these common mistakes, developers can better leverage the capabilities of the G1 garbage collector.

// Example of G1 GC JVM flags -Xms2g -Xmx2g -XX:+UseG1GC -XX:MaxGCPauseMillis=200 -XX:G1HeapRegionSize=16m

G1 garbage collector JVM tuning garbage collection heap management Full GC

Related Questions

How do I avoid rehashing overhead with std::set in multithreaded code?

How do I find elements with custom comparators with std::set for embedded targets?

How do I erase elements while iterating with std::set for embedded targets?

How do I provide stable iteration order with std::unordered_map for large datasets?

How do I reserve capacity ahead of time with std::unordered_map for large datasets?

How do I erase elements while iterating with std::unordered_map in multithreaded code?

How do I provide stable iteration order with std::map for embedded targets?

How do I provide stable iteration order with std::map in multithreaded code?

How do I avoid rehashing overhead with std::map in performance-sensitive code?

How do I merge two containers efficiently with std::map for embedded targets?