-
Enhancement
-
Resolution: Fixed
-
P2
-
fx2.0
The maximum number of columns which could be created in case heap size is 64mb is 188.
Note, the created table contains no data (zero rows), it contains only columns.
Running the test with different heap sizes shows the following results (before OOM occurs):
256mb -> 384 cols
64mb -> 188 cols => 192mb -> 196 cols => ~1,000Kb/col
16mb -> 84 cols => 240mb -> 300 cols => ~819Kb/column
16mb -> 84 cols => 48mb -> 104 cols => ~472Kb/column
8mb -> 54 cols => 248mb -> 330 cols => ~769Kb/column
8mb -> 54 cols => 8mb -> 30 cols => ~273Kb/column
This needs to be improved as the situation when user could have bunch of tables which in
summary exceed hundreds of columns is pretty realistic. Taking into account user
application have many other objects/data reaching OOM is not corner case.
The big TableColumn footprint could also be related toRT-15371 "MemoryLeak in TableColumn.observableProperties list"
but is definitely not only because of this.
The testcase is attached.
Note, the created table contains no data (zero rows), it contains only columns.
Running the test with different heap sizes shows the following results (before OOM occurs):
256mb -> 384 cols
64mb -> 188 cols => 192mb -> 196 cols => ~1,000Kb/col
16mb -> 84 cols => 240mb -> 300 cols => ~819Kb/column
16mb -> 84 cols => 48mb -> 104 cols => ~472Kb/column
8mb -> 54 cols => 248mb -> 330 cols => ~769Kb/column
8mb -> 54 cols => 8mb -> 30 cols => ~273Kb/column
This needs to be improved as the situation when user could have bunch of tables which in
summary exceed hundreds of columns is pretty realistic. Taking into account user
application have many other objects/data reaching OOM is not corner case.
The big TableColumn footprint could also be related to
but is definitely not only because of this.
The testcase is attached.
- is blocked by
-
JDK-8114276 Memory leak in PaintRunnable: root.removed is not cleared
- Closed
- relates to
-
JDK-8114276 Memory leak in PaintRunnable: root.removed is not cleared
- Closed