# G1GC Gargabe Collection - Init & max value **URL:** \ **Category:** Ignition\ **Tags:** ignition79, ignition80\ **Created:** [July 10, 2020, 4:43pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/g1gc-gargabe-collection-init-max-value/36586 "2020-07-10T16:43:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![gbrp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/d07c76/32.png) [@gbrp](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/gbrp)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2020, 4:43pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/g1gc-gargabe-collection-init-max-value/36586/1 "2020-07-10T16:43:25Z")
Hello everyone, I have a couple of questions about the best practice configuration of G1GC on Ignition. First of all, is best practice to set the init and max value to be identical on Ignition? According to this [link](https://docs.oracle.com/javase/9/gctuning/garbage-first-garbage-collector-tuning.htm#JSGCT-GUID-2428DA90-B93D-48E6-B336-A849ADF1C552): > The VM allocating or giving back memory from the operating system memory may cause unnecessary delays. Avoid the delays by setting minimum and maximum heap sizes to the same value using the options `-Xms` and `-Xmx` , and pre-touching all memory using `-XX:+AlwaysPreTouch` to move this work to the VM startup phase. I checked some other previous replies on the forum, and on this [thread](http://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/g1gc-issue-thread-viewer-causes-clock-drift/28671) the recommendation is to go for this +30% on top of the peak extra memory allocation. I wanted to understand which approach to attempt on a server returning Thread Viewer causes Clock Drift warnings. The current config is: wrapper.java.initmemory=8192 wrapper.java.maxmemory=32768 On a 64GB of ram server. In addition, I wanted to confirm that the parameters passed to 'wrapper.java.initmemory' and 'wrapper.java.maxmemory' are overriding the following when lauching the JVM: -XX:InitialHeapSize — Minimum Java heap size -XX:MaxHeapSize — Maximum Java heap size Thank you very much for any support on this. All the best, ---
**Author:** ![Kevin.Herron](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/inductiveautomation/user_avatar/forum.inductiveautomation.com/kevin.herron/32/7259_2.png) [@Kevin.Herron](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/Kevin.Herron)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2020, 4:55pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/g1gc-gargabe-collection-init-max-value/36586/2 "2020-07-10T16:55:58Z")
> [@gbrp](#): > > The VM allocating or giving back memory from the operating system memory may cause unnecessary delays. G1GC doesn't do this in JDK11, so it's not relevant. > [@gbrp](#): > > In addition, I wanted to confirm that the parameters passed to ‘wrapper.java.initmemory’ and ‘wrapper.java.maxmemory’ are overriding the following when lauching the JVM: > -XX:InitialHeapSize — Minimum Java heap size > -XX:MaxHeapSize — Maximum Java heap size Yes, they are the same thing. Your config seems fine. The thread viewer doesn't perform well when there are a lot (hundreds, maybe thousands on some systems) threads. Your memory and GC settings aren't going to really do anything about this. ---
**Author:** ![Kevin.Herron](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/inductiveautomation/user_avatar/forum.inductiveautomation.com/kevin.herron/32/7259_2.png) [@Kevin.Herron](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/Kevin.Herron)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2020, 5:03pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/g1gc-gargabe-collection-init-max-value/36586/3 "2020-07-10T17:03:58Z")
> [@Kevin.Herron](#): > > G1GC doesn’t do this in JDK11, so it’s not relevant. Hmm, actually it does in a few cases, but they really enhanced the behavior in JDK 12: [JEP 346: Promptly Return Unused Committed Memory from G1](https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/346) ---
**Author:** ![gbrp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/d07c76/32.png) [@gbrp](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/gbrp)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2020, 5:11pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/g1gc-gargabe-collection-init-max-value/36586/4 "2020-07-10T17:11:47Z")
> G1GC doesn’t do this in JDK11, so it’s not relevant. We are using JDK8 at the moment. The Oracle describes JDK9, but it appears to be the case in JDK8 as well. > Yes, they are the same thing. Thank you! I was thinking about maybe enabled the logging on the GC to see STW events latency, the machines is kind of suffering of briefs hangs from time-to-time, which should not be normal. The server is connected to about 100 devices, but the memory usage does not really exceeds 8 GB. So the init starts at 8GB as set in the wrapper but then it shrinks. ![Screenshot 2020-07-10 at 18.08.00](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/inductiveautomation/original/3X/0/8/08aabe7fb9b0b3b3a646ab1693d968c0655be3f9.png) ---
**Author:** ![Kevin.Herron](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/inductiveautomation/user_avatar/forum.inductiveautomation.com/kevin.herron/32/7259_2.png) [@Kevin.Herron](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/Kevin.Herron)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2020, 5:12pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/g1gc-gargabe-collection-init-max-value/36586/5 "2020-07-10T17:12:59Z")
Yes, enabling the GC logging is a good place to start. Your memory trend looks pretty good though. ---
**Author:** ![gbrp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/d07c76/32.png) [@gbrp](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/gbrp)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2020, 5:27pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/g1gc-gargabe-collection-init-max-value/36586/6 "2020-07-10T17:27:04Z")
> Your memory trend looks pretty good though. It does! Any recommendation on `MaxGCPauseMillis` - the default value is 20, which should be fine. ---
**Author:** ![Kevin.Herron](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/inductiveautomation/user_avatar/forum.inductiveautomation.com/kevin.herron/32/7259_2.png) [@Kevin.Herron](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/Kevin.Herron)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2020, 5:29pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/g1gc-gargabe-collection-init-max-value/36586/7 "2020-07-10T17:29:46Z")
The default is 200, not 20, isn’t it? @pturmel has had success using 100 instead, I think. I don’t typically recommend anybody start making changes unless they know what they’re doing and how to measure the difference. The defaults are usually good enough. ---
**Author:** ![pturmel](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/inductiveautomation/user_avatar/forum.inductiveautomation.com/pturmel/32/3295_2.png) [@pturmel](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/pturmel)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2020, 5:57pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/g1gc-gargabe-collection-init-max-value/36586/8 "2020-07-10T17:57:31Z")
You definitely want to print GC details when you suspect pause-the-world issues. The details are pretty noisy, like so: ```auto 2020-07-10T13:32:09.719-0400: 941803.106: [GC pause (G1 Evacuation Pause) (young), 0.0275772 secs] [Parallel Time: 20.7 ms, GC Workers: 2] [GC Worker Start (ms): Min: 941803107.5, Avg: 941803107.5, Max: 941803107.6, Diff: 0.1] [Ext Root Scanning (ms): Min: 9.5, Avg: 10.6, Max: 11.7, Diff: 2.2, Sum: 21.1] [Update RS (ms): Min: 1.5, Avg: 2.2, Max: 2.9, Diff: 1.4, Sum: 4.5] [Processed Buffers: Min: 29, Avg: 31.5, Max: 34, Diff: 5, Sum: 63] [Scan RS (ms): Min: 0.1, Avg: 0.1, Max: 0.1, Diff: 0.0, Sum: 0.2] [Code Root Scanning (ms): Min: 0.0, Avg: 0.0, Max: 0.0, Diff: 0.0, Sum: 0.0] [Object Copy (ms): Min: 7.0, Avg: 7.3, Max: 7.7, Diff: 0.7, Sum: 14.7] [Termination (ms): Min: 0.0, Avg: 0.0, Max: 0.0, Diff: 0.0, Sum: 0.0] [Termination Attempts: Min: 1, Avg: 1.0, Max: 1, Diff: 0, Sum: 2] [GC Worker Other (ms): Min: 0.0, Avg: 0.1, Max: 0.2, Diff: 0.1, Sum: 0.2] [GC Worker Total (ms): Min: 20.3, Avg: 20.3, Max: 20.4, Diff: 0.0, Sum: 40.7] [GC Worker End (ms): Min: 941803127.8, Avg: 941803127.9, Max: 941803127.9, Diff: 0.0] [Code Root Fixup: 0.0 ms] [Code Root Purge: 0.0 ms] [Clear CT: 0.3 ms] [Other: 6.6 ms] [Choose CSet: 0.0 ms] [Ref Proc: 4.7 ms] [Ref Enq: 0.1 ms] [Redirty Cards: 0.1 ms] [Humongous Register: 0.6 ms] [Humongous Reclaim: 0.0 ms] [Free CSet: 0.5 ms] [Eden: 261.0M(261.0M)->0.0B(262.0M) Survivors: 6144.0K->5120.0K Heap: 334.3M(446.0M)->74058.2K(446.0M)] [Times: user=0.05 sys=0.00, real=0.03 secs] ``` Note the actual pause time right in that first line: 27.5 ms. grep for “GC Pause” to see the important stuff. The setting for `MaxGCPauseMillis` is a goal, not a guarantee, fwiw. I’ve had success with my Ethernet/IP module with that set as low as 50ms, on an otherwise lightly loaded server, but CPU usage does go up. Also make sure you have plenty of cores. You want to ensure no event waits more than a few milliseconds to run, and runs in a few milliseconds. Push anything more intensive into a dedicated thread, and ensure you have cores for the worst case with such threads. ---
**Author:** ![gbrp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/d07c76/32.png) [@gbrp](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/gbrp)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2020, 12:07pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/g1gc-gargabe-collection-init-max-value/36586/9 "2020-07-12T12:07:11Z")
> The default is 200, not 20, isn’t it? yeah, 200! I forgot a 0! 🙂 @pturmel > You definitely want to print GC details when you suspect pause-the-world issues. > This is my plan for next week, I will set the logging in the wrapper and then will consider solutions if that is the problem. > I will update the thread if something comes up. Thank you very much for your replies.