Skip to content

Ensure multiJVM set to plain Yes for jck17+ Windows #4506

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 12, 2023

Conversation

andrew-m-leonard
Copy link
Contributor

@andrew-m-leonard andrew-m-leonard commented Apr 12, 2023

MultiJVM=group option for jck17+ causes memory exhaustion on Windows platform, so ensure for multiJVM execution type that MultiJVM is set to just "Yes"

Works around issue: #4502 (comment)

@andrew-m-leonard andrew-m-leonard self-assigned this Apr 12, 2023
@andrew-m-leonard
Copy link
Contributor Author

Grinder run on x64 Linux (uses multiJVM group) : https://ci.eclipse.org/temurin-compliance/job/Grinder/3293/
Grinder run on x64 Windows (uses plain multiJVM) : https://ci.eclipse.org/temurin-compliance/job/Grinder/3291/

Copy link
Contributor

@smlambert smlambert left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Everyone using these files picks up this change (where before they had the ability to set things in their copy of default config files). I am approving, but ideally we sequester such changes to vendor default config so as not to force a change on others if they did not need it (like if they have beefier Windows machines).

Copy link
Member

@sxa sxa left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Agree with Shelley's comment - we should revisit this post release to diagnose and attempt to test with this option enabled across environments (I'll also note that we switched it to multiJVM_group without too much discussion with external parties to my knowledge)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants