-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 98
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
Improve launcher parameters, remove unused and unnecessary ones #4
Comments
See runelite/launcher#4 for more details and explanation. Signed-off-by: Tomas Slusny <[email protected]>
See runelite/launcher#4 for more details and explanation. Signed-off-by: Tomas Slusny <[email protected]>
I'm not sure that we should be using the G1 collector. It seems to be tuned (by default) for larger (>20gb) heaps with pause times ~50ms. From some things I've read it seems we should keep using CMS/ParNew or try to tune G1 for lower (<5ms) latency on a newer JVM. http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk9-dev/2017-April/005744.html |
By following that mailing thread it looks like there have been significant improvements to G1 in Java 9 and looks like there are plans to either deprecate or remove CMS in future and G1 should be it's full replacement, so might be worth looking into. I found this tuning guide that might be enough to optimize it for our use: https://docs.oracle.com/javase/9/gctuning/garbage-first-garbage-collector-tuning.htm |
Researching more, Shenandoah looks very promising for our use case. We would have to build/update our own JRE, which is unfortunate though. |
So, we can safely replace
with
-XX:+UseG1GC
This can be removed as well, G1 will be enough.
I would say we can trust defaults?
Same here:
https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/technotes/guides/vm/gctuning/parallel.html#default_heap_size
Seems like with 1GB of memory it will be same result, and with more memory it will increase.
Based on that one the default value is already 1500, can be removed.
https://www.reddit.com/r/2007scape/comments/6oflhm/how_to_improve_your_actual_fps_on_osrs_default/
Based on that, setting that to false is obvious choice. The issue what made the decision to switch it to true was rare scenario, and this affects larger portion of userbase.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: