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

[Roberto Ostinelli]

Thank you Robert.
I'm going to try a selective fullsweep_after.

Could this also justify the process memory increase (which is more
significant)?



On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 6:00 PM, Robert Virding <rvirding@REDACTED> wrote:

> One thing you can see is that the size of the binary data is growing. This
> space contains the large binaries (> 64 bytes) which are sent in messages
> between processes. While this means that the messages become (much) smaller
> and faster to send it takes a much longer time to detect that they are no
> longer alive and can be reclaimed. Basically it takes until all the
> processes they have passed through does a full garbage collection. Setting
> fullsweep_after to 0 and doing explicit garbage collects speeds up
> reclaiming the binaries.
>
> You could be much more selective in which processes you set
> fullsweep_after to 0 and which ones you explicitly garbage collect.
>
> I don't know if the is *the* problem but it is *a* problem you have.
>
> Robert
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20150122/d42b98f8/attachment.htm>