ssl_connection process hibernation option

[Ferenc Holzhauser]

Hi,

I'm using R14B01 new SSL to set up a lot of (not very active) client
connections.

I have noticed that ssl_connection processes use a lot of memory between
GC's.
A forced GC makes them small again until the next piece of received data.

This adds up to a significant memory usage (around 350-400 kB/session on a
x64 system in my case) limiting the number of possible sessions.

An option to hibernate this gen_fsm would decrease the average memory usage
in this scenario.

Would it be possible to introduce this option?

Thanks in advance,
Ferenc

[Jeroen Koops]

I would very much appreciate this too.

As a test, I inserted a proxy-module between the gen_fsm and ssl_connection
callback, that changes all responses from the ssl_connection callback to
include the 'hibernate' option (it's not a hack -- it's AOP!) and the
savings are dramatic: before the change an SSL connection used around 350
kB, after the change only around 600 bytes. If a system is maintaining
thousands of SSL connections, this really adds up.

If we could somehow get hibernation built in to the ssl application, that
would be great.

On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Ferenc Holzhauser <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I'm using R14B01 new SSL to set up a lot of (not very active) client
> connections.
>
> I have noticed that ssl_connection processes use a lot of memory between
> GC's.
> A forced GC makes them small again until the next piece of received data.
>
> This adds up to a significant memory usage (around 350-400 kB/session on a
> x64 system in my case) limiting the number of possible sessions.
>
> An option to hibernate this gen_fsm would decrease the average memory usage
> in this scenario.
>
> Would it be possible to introduce this option?
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Ferenc
>

[Ingela Andin]

Hi!

We already put some effort into cleaning the state of the gen_fsm
processes holding the connection,
but some form of hibernation could be interesting too we will take
this into consideration.

Regards Ingela Erlang/OTP team - Ericsson AB

2011/2/4 Jeroen Koops <[hidden email]>:

> I would very much appreciate this too.
>
> As a test, I inserted a proxy-module between the gen_fsm and ssl_connection
> callback, that changes all responses from the ssl_connection callback to
> include the 'hibernate' option (it's not a hack -- it's AOP!) and the
> savings are dramatic: before the change an SSL connection used around 350
> kB, after the change only around 600 bytes. If a system is maintaining
> thousands of SSL connections, this really adds up.
>
> If we could somehow get hibernation built in to the ssl application, that
> would be great.
>
> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Ferenc Holzhauser <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm using R14B01 new SSL to set up a lot of (not very active) client
>> connections.
>>
>> I have noticed that ssl_connection processes use a lot of memory between
>> GC's.
>> A forced GC makes them small again until the next piece of received data.
>>
>> This adds up to a significant memory usage (around 350-400 kB/session on a
>> x64 system in my case) limiting the number of possible sessions.
>>
>> An option to hibernate this gen_fsm would decrease the average memory usage
>> in this scenario.
>>
>> Would it be possible to introduce this option?
>>
>> Thanks in advance,
>> Ferenc
>>
>

________________________________________________________________
erlang-questions (at) erlang.org mailing list.
See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html
To unsubscribe; mailto:[hidden email]

[Kaiduan Xie-2]

Ingela,

This is a great news, Ingela. When can we have this improvement?

Best regards,

/Kaiduan

On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 10:51 AM, Ingela Andin <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi!
>
> We already put some effort into cleaning the state of the gen_fsm
> processes holding the connection,
> but some form of hibernation could be interesting too we will take
> this into consideration.
>
> Regards Ingela Erlang/OTP team - Ericsson AB
>
> 2011/2/4 Jeroen Koops <[hidden email]>:
>> I would very much appreciate this too.
>>
>> As a test, I inserted a proxy-module between the gen_fsm and ssl_connection
>> callback, that changes all responses from the ssl_connection callback to
>> include the 'hibernate' option (it's not a hack -- it's AOP!) and the
>> savings are dramatic: before the change an SSL connection used around 350
>> kB, after the change only around 600 bytes. If a system is maintaining
>> thousands of SSL connections, this really adds up.
>>
>> If we could somehow get hibernation built in to the ssl application, that
>> would be great.
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Ferenc Holzhauser <
>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I'm using R14B01 new SSL to set up a lot of (not very active) client
>>> connections.
>>>
>>> I have noticed that ssl_connection processes use a lot of memory between
>>> GC's.
>>> A forced GC makes them small again until the next piece of received data.
>>>
>>> This adds up to a significant memory usage (around 350-400 kB/session on a
>>> x64 system in my case) limiting the number of possible sessions.
>>>
>>> An option to hibernate this gen_fsm would decrease the average memory usage
>>> in this scenario.
>>>
>>> Would it be possible to introduce this option?
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance,
>>> Ferenc
>>>
>>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> erlang-questions (at) erlang.org mailing list.
> See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html
> To unsubscribe; mailto:[hidden email]
>
>

________________________________________________________________
erlang-questions (at) erlang.org mailing list.
See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html
To unsubscribe; mailto:[hidden email]

[Ingela Andin]

Hi!

It is already on github on our dev-branch and will be part of the next
release.

Regards Ingela Erlang/OTP team - Ericsson AB

2011/2/4 Kaiduan Xie <[hidden email]>:

> Ingela,
>
> This is a great news, Ingela. When can we have this improvement?
>
> Best regards,
>
> /Kaiduan
>
> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 10:51 AM, Ingela Andin <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> We already put some effort into cleaning the state of the gen_fsm
>> processes holding the connection,
>> but some form of hibernation could be interesting too we will take
>> this into consideration.
>>
>> Regards Ingela Erlang/OTP team - Ericsson AB
>>
>> 2011/2/4 Jeroen Koops <[hidden email]>:
>>> I would very much appreciate this too.
>>>
>>> As a test, I inserted a proxy-module between the gen_fsm and ssl_connection
>>> callback, that changes all responses from the ssl_connection callback to
>>> include the 'hibernate' option (it's not a hack -- it's AOP!) and the
>>> savings are dramatic: before the change an SSL connection used around 350
>>> kB, after the change only around 600 bytes. If a system is maintaining
>>> thousands of SSL connections, this really adds up.
>>>
>>> If we could somehow get hibernation built in to the ssl application, that
>>> would be great.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Ferenc Holzhauser <
>>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I'm using R14B01 new SSL to set up a lot of (not very active) client
>>>> connections.
>>>>
>>>> I have noticed that ssl_connection processes use a lot of memory between
>>>> GC's.
>>>> A forced GC makes them small again until the next piece of received data.
>>>>
>>>> This adds up to a significant memory usage (around 350-400 kB/session on a
>>>> x64 system in my case) limiting the number of possible sessions.
>>>>
>>>> An option to hibernate this gen_fsm would decrease the average memory usage
>>>> in this scenario.
>>>>
>>>> Would it be possible to introduce this option?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks in advance,
>>>> Ferenc
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> ________________________________________________________________
>> erlang-questions (at) erlang.org mailing list.
>> See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html
>> To unsubscribe; mailto:[hidden email]
>>
>>
>

________________________________________________________________
erlang-questions (at) erlang.org mailing list.
See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html
To unsubscribe; mailto:[hidden email]

[Ingela Andin-2]

Hi!

We (the OTP team) would consider it.

Regards Ingela Erlang/OTP team - Ericsson AB


2011/2/4 Jeroen Koops <[hidden email]>:

> Hi Ingela,
> Thanks for your response. Suppose I come up with a patch for this, do you
> think the OTP team would consider it for inclusion in an upcoming release?
>
> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 4:51 PM, Ingela Andin <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> We already put some effort into cleaning the state of the gen_fsm
>> processes holding the connection,
>> but some form of hibernation could be interesting too we will take
>> this into consideration.
>>
>> Regards Ingela Erlang/OTP team - Ericsson AB
>>
>> 2011/2/4 Jeroen Koops <[hidden email]>:
>> > I would very much appreciate this too.
>> >
>> > As a test, I inserted a proxy-module between the gen_fsm and
>> > ssl_connection
>> > callback, that changes all responses from the ssl_connection callback to
>> > include the 'hibernate' option (it's not a hack -- it's AOP!) and the
>> > savings are dramatic: before the change an SSL connection used around
>> > 350
>> > kB, after the change only around 600 bytes. If a system is maintaining
>> > thousands of SSL connections, this really adds up.
>> >
>> > If we could somehow get hibernation built in to the ssl application,
>> > that
>> > would be great.
>> >
>> > On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Ferenc Holzhauser <
>> > [hidden email]> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> I'm using R14B01 new SSL to set up a lot of (not very active) client
>> >> connections.
>> >>
>> >> I have noticed that ssl_connection processes use a lot of memory
>> >> between
>> >> GC's.
>> >> A forced GC makes them small again until the next piece of received
>> >> data.
>> >>
>> >> This adds up to a significant memory usage (around 350-400 kB/session
>> >> on a
>> >> x64 system in my case) limiting the number of possible sessions.
>> >>
>> >> An option to hibernate this gen_fsm would decrease the average memory
>> >> usage
>> >> in this scenario.
>> >>
>> >> Would it be possible to introduce this option?
>> >>
>> >> Thanks in advance,
>> >> Ferenc
>> >>
>> >
>
>

________________________________________________________________
erlang-questions (at) erlang.org mailing list.
See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html
To unsubscribe; mailto:[hidden email]

[Kaiduan Xie-2]

Ingela,

May I have a suggestion to have the option to set the idle time for
SSL connection so that after a mount of time of idle, the SSL
connection will be put into hibernation?

Thanks,

/Kaiduan

On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 3:32 AM, Ingela Andin <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi!
>
> We (the OTP team) would consider it.
>
> Regards Ingela Erlang/OTP team - Ericsson AB
>
>
> 2011/2/4 Jeroen Koops <[hidden email]>:
>> Hi Ingela,
>> Thanks for your response. Suppose I come up with a patch for this, do you
>> think the OTP team would consider it for inclusion in an upcoming release?
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 4:51 PM, Ingela Andin <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> We already put some effort into cleaning the state of the gen_fsm
>>> processes holding the connection,
>>> but some form of hibernation could be interesting too we will take
>>> this into consideration.
>>>
>>> Regards Ingela Erlang/OTP team - Ericsson AB
>>>
>>> 2011/2/4 Jeroen Koops <[hidden email]>:
>>> > I would very much appreciate this too.
>>> >
>>> > As a test, I inserted a proxy-module between the gen_fsm and
>>> > ssl_connection
>>> > callback, that changes all responses from the ssl_connection callback to
>>> > include the 'hibernate' option (it's not a hack -- it's AOP!) and the
>>> > savings are dramatic: before the change an SSL connection used around
>>> > 350
>>> > kB, after the change only around 600 bytes. If a system is maintaining
>>> > thousands of SSL connections, this really adds up.
>>> >
>>> > If we could somehow get hibernation built in to the ssl application,
>>> > that
>>> > would be great.
>>> >
>>> > On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Ferenc Holzhauser <
>>> > [hidden email]> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Hi,
>>> >>
>>> >> I'm using R14B01 new SSL to set up a lot of (not very active) client
>>> >> connections.
>>> >>
>>> >> I have noticed that ssl_connection processes use a lot of memory
>>> >> between
>>> >> GC's.
>>> >> A forced GC makes them small again until the next piece of received
>>> >> data.
>>> >>
>>> >> This adds up to a significant memory usage (around 350-400 kB/session
>>> >> on a
>>> >> x64 system in my case) limiting the number of possible sessions.
>>> >>
>>> >> An option to hibernate this gen_fsm would decrease the average memory
>>> >> usage
>>> >> in this scenario.
>>> >>
>>> >> Would it be possible to introduce this option?
>>> >>
>>> >> Thanks in advance,
>>> >> Ferenc
>>> >>
>>> >
>>
>>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> erlang-questions (at) erlang.org mailing list.
> See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html
> To unsubscribe; mailto:[hidden email]
>
>

________________________________________________________________
erlang-questions (at) erlang.org mailing list.
See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html
To unsubscribe; mailto:[hidden email]

[Ingela Andin-2]

Hi!

I think hibernation should be optional and if you choose to use it, it
could have configurtion parameters such as the
one you suggest.

Regards Ingela Erlang/OTP team - Ericsson AB

2011/2/7 Kaiduan Xie <[hidden email]>:

> Ingela,
>
> May I have a suggestion to have the option to set the idle time for
> SSL connection so that after a mount of time of idle, the SSL
> connection will be put into hibernation?
>
> Thanks,
>
> /Kaiduan
>
> On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 3:32 AM, Ingela Andin <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> We (the OTP team) would consider it.
>>
>> Regards Ingela Erlang/OTP team - Ericsson AB
>>
>>
>> 2011/2/4 Jeroen Koops <[hidden email]>:
>>> Hi Ingela,
>>> Thanks for your response. Suppose I come up with a patch for this, do you
>>> think the OTP team would consider it for inclusion in an upcoming release?
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 4:51 PM, Ingela Andin <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi!
>>>>
>>>> We already put some effort into cleaning the state of the gen_fsm
>>>> processes holding the connection,
>>>> but some form of hibernation could be interesting too we will take
>>>> this into consideration.
>>>>
>>>> Regards Ingela Erlang/OTP team - Ericsson AB
>>>>
>>>> 2011/2/4 Jeroen Koops <[hidden email]>:
>>>> > I would very much appreciate this too.
>>>> >
>>>> > As a test, I inserted a proxy-module between the gen_fsm and
>>>> > ssl_connection
>>>> > callback, that changes all responses from the ssl_connection callback to
>>>> > include the 'hibernate' option (it's not a hack -- it's AOP!) and the
>>>> > savings are dramatic: before the change an SSL connection used around
>>>> > 350
>>>> > kB, after the change only around 600 bytes. If a system is maintaining
>>>> > thousands of SSL connections, this really adds up.
>>>> >
>>>> > If we could somehow get hibernation built in to the ssl application,
>>>> > that
>>>> > would be great.
>>>> >
>>>> > On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Ferenc Holzhauser <
>>>> > [hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> Hi,
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I'm using R14B01 new SSL to set up a lot of (not very active) client
>>>> >> connections.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I have noticed that ssl_connection processes use a lot of memory
>>>> >> between
>>>> >> GC's.
>>>> >> A forced GC makes them small again until the next piece of received
>>>> >> data.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> This adds up to a significant memory usage (around 350-400 kB/session
>>>> >> on a
>>>> >> x64 system in my case) limiting the number of possible sessions.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> An option to hibernate this gen_fsm would decrease the average memory
>>>> >> usage
>>>> >> in this scenario.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Would it be possible to introduce this option?
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Thanks in advance,
>>>> >> Ferenc
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ________________________________________________________________
>> erlang-questions (at) erlang.org mailing list.
>> See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html
>> To unsubscribe; mailto:[hidden email]
>>
>>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> erlang-questions (at) erlang.org mailing list.
> See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html
> To unsubscribe; mailto:[hidden email]
>
>

________________________________________________________________
erlang-questions (at) erlang.org mailing list.
See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html
To unsubscribe; mailto:[hidden email]

[Kaiduan Xie-2]

Ingela,

I also found ssl_connection_sup consumes a lot of memory. For the
system with 20K SSL connections, ssl_connection_sup eats 65,638,608
bytes (65M), so for each SSL connection, ssl_connection_sup itself
takes about 3K bytes. Do you have any idea to reduce this? This result
is taken from R14A on x86/SMP.

Thanks for help,

/Kaiduan

(erlsip_proxy@dell-xps-7100)6> process_info(pid(0,66,0)).
[{registered_name,ssl_connection_sup},
 {current_function,{gen_server,loop,6}},
 {initial_call,{proc_lib,init_p,5}},
 {status,waiting},
 {message_queue_len,0},
 {messages,[]},
 {links,[<0.16515.0>,<0.133.1>,<0.4229.1>,<0.6277.1>,
         <0.7301.1>,<0.7813.1>,<0.8069.1>,<0.8197.1>,<0.8261.1>,
         <0.8293.1>,<0.8309.1>,<0.8317.1>,<0.8321.1>,<0.8325.1>,
         <0.8327.1>,<0.8323.1>,<0.8319.1>,<0.8313.1>,<0.8315.1>,
         <0.8311.1>|...]},
 {dictionary,[{'$ancestors',[ssl_sup,<0.62.0>]},
              {'$initial_call',{supervisor,ssl_connection_sup,1}}]},
 {trap_exit,true},
 {error_handler,error_handler},
 {priority,normal},
 {group_leader,<0.61.0>},
 {total_heap_size,8102320},
 {heap_size,1682835},
 {stack_size,9},
 {reductions,2046919},
 {garbage_collection,[{min_bin_vheap_size,46368},
                      {min_heap_size,233},
                      {fullsweep_after,65535},
                      {minor_gcs,6}]},
 {suspending,[]}]
(erlsip_proxy@dell-xps-7100)7> process_info(pid(0,66,0),memory).
{memory,65638608}


On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 2:19 AM, Ingela Andin <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi!
>
> I think hibernation should be optional and if you choose to use it, it
> could have configurtion parameters such as the
> one you suggest.
>
> Regards Ingela Erlang/OTP team - Ericsson AB
>
> 2011/2/7 Kaiduan Xie <[hidden email]>:
>> Ingela,
>>
>> May I have a suggestion to have the option to set the idle time for
>> SSL connection so that after a mount of time of idle, the SSL
>> connection will be put into hibernation?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> /Kaiduan
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 3:32 AM, Ingela Andin <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> We (the OTP team) would consider it.
>>>
>>> Regards Ingela Erlang/OTP team - Ericsson AB
>>>
>>>
>>> 2011/2/4 Jeroen Koops <[hidden email]>:
>>>> Hi Ingela,
>>>> Thanks for your response. Suppose I come up with a patch for this, do you
>>>> think the OTP team would consider it for inclusion in an upcoming release?
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 4:51 PM, Ingela Andin <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi!
>>>>>
>>>>> We already put some effort into cleaning the state of the gen_fsm
>>>>> processes holding the connection,
>>>>> but some form of hibernation could be interesting too we will take
>>>>> this into consideration.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards Ingela Erlang/OTP team - Ericsson AB
>>>>>
>>>>> 2011/2/4 Jeroen Koops <[hidden email]>:
>>>>> > I would very much appreciate this too.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > As a test, I inserted a proxy-module between the gen_fsm and
>>>>> > ssl_connection
>>>>> > callback, that changes all responses from the ssl_connection callback to
>>>>> > include the 'hibernate' option (it's not a hack -- it's AOP!) and the
>>>>> > savings are dramatic: before the change an SSL connection used around
>>>>> > 350
>>>>> > kB, after the change only around 600 bytes. If a system is maintaining
>>>>> > thousands of SSL connections, this really adds up.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > If we could somehow get hibernation built in to the ssl application,
>>>>> > that
>>>>> > would be great.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Ferenc Holzhauser <
>>>>> > [hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> >> Hi,
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> I'm using R14B01 new SSL to set up a lot of (not very active) client
>>>>> >> connections.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> I have noticed that ssl_connection processes use a lot of memory
>>>>> >> between
>>>>> >> GC's.
>>>>> >> A forced GC makes them small again until the next piece of received
>>>>> >> data.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> This adds up to a significant memory usage (around 350-400 kB/session
>>>>> >> on a
>>>>> >> x64 system in my case) limiting the number of possible sessions.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> An option to hibernate this gen_fsm would decrease the average memory
>>>>> >> usage
>>>>> >> in this scenario.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Would it be possible to introduce this option?
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Thanks in advance,
>>>>> >> Ferenc
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> ________________________________________________________________
>>> erlang-questions (at) erlang.org mailing list.
>>> See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html
>>> To unsubscribe; mailto:[hidden email]
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ________________________________________________________________
>> erlang-questions (at) erlang.org mailing list.
>> See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html
>> To unsubscribe; mailto:[hidden email]
>>
>>
>

________________________________________________________________
erlang-questions (at) erlang.org mailing list.
See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html
To unsubscribe; mailto:[hidden email]

[Ingela Anderton Andin]

Hi!

Well this seems to be a supervisor-problem rather than a ssl-problem.
Supervisors saves init-parameters to be able to restart processes, which
is natural,
but it seems to do this even for temporary processes which is
unnecessary and
could be quite expensive. We will look in to this.

Regards Ingela Erlang/OTP - Ericsson AB

Kaiduan Xie wrote:

> Ingela,
>
> I also found ssl_connection_sup consumes a lot of memory. For the
> system with 20K SSL connections, ssl_connection_sup eats 65,638,608
> bytes (65M), so for each SSL connection, ssl_connection_sup itself
> takes about 3K bytes. Do you have any idea to reduce this? This result
> is taken from R14A on x86/SMP.
>
> Thanks for help,
>
> /Kaiduan
>
> (erlsip_proxy@dell-xps-7100)6> process_info(pid(0,66,0)).
> [{registered_name,ssl_connection_sup},
>  {current_function,{gen_server,loop,6}},
>  {initial_call,{proc_lib,init_p,5}},
>  {status,waiting},
>  {message_queue_len,0},
>  {messages,[]},
>  {links,[<0.16515.0>,<0.133.1>,<0.4229.1>,<0.6277.1>,
>          <0.7301.1>,<0.7813.1>,<0.8069.1>,<0.8197.1>,<0.8261.1>,
>          <0.8293.1>,<0.8309.1>,<0.8317.1>,<0.8321.1>,<0.8325.1>,
>          <0.8327.1>,<0.8323.1>,<0.8319.1>,<0.8313.1>,<0.8315.1>,
>          <0.8311.1>|...]},
>  {dictionary,[{'$ancestors',[ssl_sup,<0.62.0>]},
>               {'$initial_call',{supervisor,ssl_connection_sup,1}}]},
>  {trap_exit,true},
>  {error_handler,error_handler},
>  {priority,normal},
>  {group_leader,<0.61.0>},
>  {total_heap_size,8102320},
>  {heap_size,1682835},
>  {stack_size,9},
>  {reductions,2046919},
>  {garbage_collection,[{min_bin_vheap_size,46368},
>                       {min_heap_size,233},
>                       {fullsweep_after,65535},
>                       {minor_gcs,6}]},
>  {suspending,[]}]
> (erlsip_proxy@dell-xps-7100)7> process_info(pid(0,66,0),memory).
> {memory,65638608}
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 2:19 AM, Ingela Andin <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  
>> Hi!
>>
>> I think hibernation should be optional and if you choose to use it, it
>> could have configurtion parameters such as the
>> one you suggest.
>>
>> Regards Ingela Erlang/OTP team - Ericsson AB
>>
>> 2011/2/7 Kaiduan Xie <[hidden email]>:
>>    
>>> Ingela,
>>>
>>> May I have a suggestion to have the option to set the idle time for
>>> SSL connection so that after a mount of time of idle, the SSL
>>> connection will be put into hibernation?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> /Kaiduan
>>>
>>> On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 3:32 AM, Ingela Andin <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>      
>>>> Hi!
>>>>
>>>> We (the OTP team) would consider it.
>>>>
>>>> Regards Ingela Erlang/OTP team - Ericsson AB
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2011/2/4 Jeroen Koops <[hidden email]>:
>>>>        
>>>>> Hi Ingela,
>>>>> Thanks for your response. Suppose I come up with a patch for this, do you
>>>>> think the OTP team would consider it for inclusion in an upcoming release?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 4:51 PM, Ingela Andin <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>          
>>>>>> Hi!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We already put some effort into cleaning the state of the gen_fsm
>>>>>> processes holding the connection,
>>>>>> but some form of hibernation could be interesting too we will take
>>>>>> this into consideration.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards Ingela Erlang/OTP team - Ericsson AB
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2011/2/4 Jeroen Koops <[hidden email]>:
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>> I would very much appreciate this too.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As a test, I inserted a proxy-module between the gen_fsm and
>>>>>>> ssl_connection
>>>>>>> callback, that changes all responses from the ssl_connection callback to
>>>>>>> include the 'hibernate' option (it's not a hack -- it's AOP!) and the
>>>>>>> savings are dramatic: before the change an SSL connection used around
>>>>>>> 350
>>>>>>> kB, after the change only around 600 bytes. If a system is maintaining
>>>>>>> thousands of SSL connections, this really adds up.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If we could somehow get hibernation built in to the ssl application,
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> would be great.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Ferenc Holzhauser <
>>>>>>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>              
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm using R14B01 new SSL to set up a lot of (not very active) client
>>>>>>>> connections.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have noticed that ssl_connection processes use a lot of memory
>>>>>>>> between
>>>>>>>> GC's.
>>>>>>>> A forced GC makes them small again until the next piece of received
>>>>>>>> data.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This adds up to a significant memory usage (around 350-400 kB/session
>>>>>>>> on a
>>>>>>>> x64 system in my case) limiting the number of possible sessions.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> An option to hibernate this gen_fsm would decrease the average memory
>>>>>>>> usage
>>>>>>>> in this scenario.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Would it be possible to introduce this option?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks in advance,
>>>>>>>> Ferenc
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>                
>>>>>          
>>>> ________________________________________________________________
>>>> erlang-questions (at) erlang.org mailing list.
>>>> See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html
>>>> To unsubscribe; mailto:[hidden email]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>> ________________________________________________________________
>>> erlang-questions (at) erlang.org mailing list.
>>> See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html
>>> To unsubscribe; mailto:[hidden email]
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>
>  

________________________________________________________________
erlang-questions (at) erlang.org mailing list.
See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html
To unsubscribe; mailto:[hidden email]