[erlang-questions] Garbage Collection, BEAM memory and Erlang memory

[Roberto Ostinelli]

As an addendum: I apologise because this cannot be clearly seen in the
charts (I forgot to "humanise" the axis), but we're talking about a steady
RAM usage of 4.5GB without SSL, in comparison to blowing up a node with
30GB with SSL.

Best,
r.

On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 3:11 PM, Roberto Ostinelli <roberto@REDACTED>
wrote:

> Dear List,
> Given the amount of answers I got in this post, I want to follow up and
> give some additional information.
>
> After struggling for quite a while, I just did a comparison between using
> SSL connections vs standard TCP connections.
> The results are quite impressive.
>
> This is the diagram of memory evolution for a system under load, with SSL:
> https://cldup.com/cNOc8hS004-2000x2000.png
>
> This is the same system, but without SSL:
> https://cldup.com/sx3RrdMR8o-3000x3000.png
>
> You can clearly see that using standard TCP connections the system is
> extremely stable.
> Using SSL connections, on the other hand, results in RAM memory having
> very erratic behavior that ends up blowing up the node.
>
> Not sure what to do with this information, except that I'm going to use a
> SSL termination (HAProxy or ELB) and have my Erlang node run without SSL.
>
> If anyone is curious just ping me.
>
> Best,
> r.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 8:09 PM, Roberto Ostinelli <
> roberto.ostinelli@REDACTED> wrote:
>
>> That's a valid point, and I can clarify.
>>
>> During the first phase, all the long lived connections are made. During
>> the second phase, newly-created short lived connections send messages to
>> the long lived ones.
>>
>> The long lived connection are all connected when the first memory
>> increase phase ends, which is when the short-lived connections start
>> sending messages.
>>
>> What is unclear to me is why the second memory increase phase happens
>> quite some time after these short lived processes have started sending
>> messages.
>>
>>
>> > On 28/gen/2015, at 20:02, Anton Lebedevich <mabrek@REDACTED> wrote:
>> >
>> > The graph looks really weird for me assuming that the load applied to
>> > the system is stable. Why does it go down for a short time and then
>> > jumps higher than it was?
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20150220/d355f0a6/attachment.htm>