memory

问题 I am working with a team developing a Java GUI application running on a 1GB Linux target system. We have a problem where the memory used by our java process grows indefinitely, until Linux finally kills the java process. Our heap memory is healthy and stable. (we have profiled our heap extensively) We also used MemoryMXBean to monitor the application's non heap memory usage, since we believed the problem might lie there. However, what we see is that reported heap size + reported non heap size

问题 I am working with a team developing a Java GUI application running on a 1GB Linux target system. We have a problem where the memory used by our java process grows indefinitely, until Linux finally kills the java process. Our heap memory is healthy and stable. (we have profiled our heap extensively) We also used MemoryMXBean to monitor the application's non heap memory usage, since we believed the problem might lie there. However, what we see is that reported heap size + reported non heap size

问题 I am working with a team developing a Java GUI application running on a 1GB Linux target system. We have a problem where the memory used by our java process grows indefinitely, until Linux finally kills the java process. Our heap memory is healthy and stable. (we have profiled our heap extensively) We also used MemoryMXBean to monitor the application's non heap memory usage, since we believed the problem might lie there. However, what we see is that reported heap size + reported non heap size

问题 I am working with a team developing a Java GUI application running on a 1GB Linux target system. We have a problem where the memory used by our java process grows indefinitely, until Linux finally kills the java process. Our heap memory is healthy and stable. (we have profiled our heap extensively) We also used MemoryMXBean to monitor the application's non heap memory usage, since we believed the problem might lie there. However, what we see is that reported heap size + reported non heap size

问题 I am working with a team developing a Java GUI application running on a 1GB Linux target system. We have a problem where the memory used by our java process grows indefinitely, until Linux finally kills the java process. Our heap memory is healthy and stable. (we have profiled our heap extensively) We also used MemoryMXBean to monitor the application's non heap memory usage, since we believed the problem might lie there. However, what we see is that reported heap size + reported non heap size

问题 I am working with a team developing a Java GUI application running on a 1GB Linux target system. We have a problem where the memory used by our java process grows indefinitely, until Linux finally kills the java process. Our heap memory is healthy and stable. (we have profiled our heap extensively) We also used MemoryMXBean to monitor the application's non heap memory usage, since we believed the problem might lie there. However, what we see is that reported heap size + reported non heap size

问题 On x86-64 platforms, the CLFLUSH assembly instruction allows to flush the cache line corresponding to a given address. Instead of flushing the cache related to a specific address, would there be a way to flush the entire cache (either the cache related to the program being executed, or the entire cache), for example by making it full of dummy contents (or any other approach I would not be aware of): using only standard C++17? using standard C++17 and compiler intrinsics if necessary? What

问题 On x86-64 platforms, the CLFLUSH assembly instruction allows to flush the cache line corresponding to a given address. Instead of flushing the cache related to a specific address, would there be a way to flush the entire cache (either the cache related to the program being executed, or the entire cache), for example by making it full of dummy contents (or any other approach I would not be aware of): using only standard C++17? using standard C++17 and compiler intrinsics if necessary? What

问题 I'm confused because from reading the wiki page it seems like just having a checkValidate and commit system for loads and stores. Is the purpose to solve synchronization problems? Is it a software programming thing build on-top of current hardware, or is it a hardware implementation via an ISA? What's the difference between each (HW/SW) implementation? Thanks. 回答1: Transactional Memory is the concept of using transactions rather than locks to synchronise processes that execute in parallel and

问题 I'm confused because from reading the wiki page it seems like just having a checkValidate and commit system for loads and stores. Is the purpose to solve synchronization problems? Is it a software programming thing build on-top of current hardware, or is it a hardware implementation via an ISA? What's the difference between each (HW/SW) implementation? Thanks. 回答1: Transactional Memory is the concept of using transactions rather than locks to synchronise processes that execute in parallel and