java.xmx.absolute_part for ActiveGate with mainly extensions v2

AntonioSousa — Sun, 18 Jun 2023 19:12:55 GMT

I have been making some tests to get an efficient use of resources on AGs that I have that mainly do extensions v2. I have looked especially at memory, so EEC can have more memory available. I have made some changes, including:

Changed the performance profile of AGs to "High limits". I didn't change to "Dedicated limits" as I have extensions v1 also running, and documentation says we should not do it in these circumstances. But still curious if it can be done?
https://www.dynatrace.com/support/help/extend-dynatrace/extensions20/extensions-concepts#ag-performance-profile
Restricted AG functionality according to https://www.dynatrace.com/support/help/extend-dynatrace/extensions20/dedicated-performance-profile
Not quite sure of the impact, as a lot of jars for these functionalities are still being loaded into the AG process.
I entered the lines below in launcheruserconfig.conf, according to https://www.dynatrace.com/support/help/setup-and-configuration/dynatrace-activegate/configuration/configure-activegate
They really seem to make a little difference in memory consumption.
https://www.dynatrace.com/support/help/shortlink/sgw-configure#memory-limits

-java.xmx.absolute_part=2000
-java.xmx.relative_part=0

Now, looking at the dsfm metrics for the ActiveGates, especially dsfm:active_gate.jvm.heap_memory_used, I have noticed that it doesn't go above 700 MB, and normally is much lower. Which makes me wonder if the java.xmx.absolute_part can't be defined lower than 2000?

Re: java.xmx.absolute_part for ActiveGate with mainly extensions v2

ChadTurner — Thu, 03 Aug 2023 20:03:32 GMT

great stuff @AntonioSousa looking forward to your findings

topic java.xmx.absolute_part for ActiveGate with mainly extensions v2 in Extensions

java.xmx.absolute_part for ActiveGate with mainly extensions v2

Re: java.xmx.absolute_part for ActiveGate with mainly extensions v2