Take the 2-minute tour ×
Server Fault is a question and answer site for system and network administrators. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I have a (sparc) Solaris 10 server with 16G of RAM. There are over 4G free.

Memory: 16G phys mem, 4371M free mem, 8193M swap, 8193M free swap

I am running a lot of java processes (I'm using the 32-bit JVM because none of them need a lot of memory) and want to run another one. But it claims to be out of memory.

# /usr/jdk/jdk1.6.0_17/bin/java -version
Error occurred during initialization of VM
Could not reserve enough space for object heap

I tried running with a reduced memory pool max size (-Xmx). Then I gradually increased the ceiling until it was very high indeed. How much should it be allocating without the -Xmx flag? According to this page, I wouldn't expect it to try to use more than 1G. And yet I can go to more than three times that without error.

# /usr/jdk/jdk1.6.0_17/bin/java -Xmx3900m -version
java version "1.6.0_17"
Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.6.0_17-b04)
Java HotSpot(TM) Server VM (build 14.3-b01, mixed mode)

If I raise it above that level, then I start to get other errors, but I would expect that since I am approaching the 4G limit of address space for a 32-bit process anyway.

What could possibly be happening here, and how can I diagnose it myself? Edit: most of the java processes are running as different users (no more than 10 per user). But note in the above that I am trying to launch the new process (merely 'java -version') as root.

# ulimit -a
core file size        (blocks, -c) unlimited
data seg size         (kbytes, -d) unlimited
file size             (blocks, -f) unlimited
open files                    (-n) 256
pipe size          (512 bytes, -p) 10
stack size            (kbytes, -s) 8192
cpu time             (seconds, -t) unlimited
max user processes            (-u) 29995
virtual memory        (kbytes, -v) unlimited
share|improve this question
    
Offtopic. It is pointless to have that much swap. It looks like whoever setup that server used the "half of total memory" rule. But anything over 1 GiB is pretty much a waste of disk space. –  Juliano Jul 1 '10 at 1:02
    
@Juliano: ORLY? docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/817-5093/fsswap-31050?l=en&a=view ... blogs.sun.com/jimlaurent/entry/solaris_faq_myths_and_facts ... also it depends on what is running on the server. –  Zac Thompson Jul 2 '10 at 2:59
    
@Juliano: I'm afraid your comment is inappropriate in that case as the swap is too small here, not too large. –  jlliagre Jun 8 '11 at 20:56

5 Answers 5

up vote 1 down vote accepted

You are clearly running out of swap space. The fact you still have free RAM is unrelated. Solaris isn't overcommitting memory so all the reservations must be backed by virtual memory.

Have a look at swap -s output to get information about virtual memory (a.k.a. swap) usage.

share|improve this answer
    
interesting! ... I think this was almost certainly the issue. In retrospect this makes a lot of sense. I'll do a bit more investigation. –  Zac Thompson Jun 8 '11 at 22:04
    
I can't be sure that this was my issue at the time, but I've confirmed that it definitely could have been the root cause. Accepting. –  Zac Thompson Jun 14 '11 at 16:49

I ran into a problem on a solaris 10 box that had plenty of physical memory and a project that allowed my application user to open pretty much as many processes and use as much memory as it wanted (planning on implementing control of resources at the application configuration level) and it turned out that java was unable to allocate a heap that was larger than the available space in /tmp which on my specific setup was mounted out of "swap" and fluctuated sometimes allowing larger heaps and other times restricting it down to almost less than 100m. I have not resolved this as of yet but with trial and error (trying heap initial sizes just above or below the /tmp available space) I am pretty sure the next step is to bring stability to the /tmp mountpoint.

share|improve this answer

Solaris invokes a 32-bit JVM per default, if you put -d64 as the first JVM arg it will invoke the sparcv9 (64-bit) version of the JVm.

$ /opt/java/jdk1.6.0_16/bin/java -version
java version "1.6.0_16"
Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.6.0_16-b01)
Java HotSpot(TM) Server VM (build 14.2-b01, mixed mode)

$ /opt/java/jdk1.6.0_16/bin/java -d64 -version
java version "1.6.0_16"
Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.6.0_16-b01)
Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 14.2-b01, mixed mode)
share|improve this answer

To get some more detail, you can start java under truss: truss java -version (the dtrace version, dtruss, is another nice option).

That will show you all the syscalls that java executes. The most interesting ones will occur towards the end, just before the syscalls to print your error message. If it's an mmap() giving ENOMEM, I'd look into your memory situation again -- can Solaris be affected by memory fragmentation?

My hunch is that it's files; if you're running several other processes or daemons as root, you might be close to the default limit.

share|improve this answer

you may have limits on per-process memory usage. IIRC, a memory limit set by ulimit restricts aggregate memory usage of a process and all its children. If you have spawned a number of JVMs from a shell the total aggregate limit of the shell's children may be exceeded (if a limit of this sort is set).

Try typing ulimit -a to see what limits you have in force.

share|improve this answer
    
I'm trying to launch "java -version" as root, and most of the other processes are running as other users. I've pasted "ulimit -a" output above. I had checked it before, but I'm nowhere near the process limit. –  Zac Thompson Jun 29 '10 at 22:29
    
Your data segment size is unlimited, so this probably isn't causing the JVM to run out of memory, as it uses the data segment for its heap. According to the output your stack is limited to 8MB - although the error message complains about heap space, you could try changing that and see if it helps. –  ConcernedOfTunbridgeWells Jun 30 '10 at 8:28

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.