On 10/29/07, Bulat Ziganshin
you may also look at these data:
1,225,416 bytes allocated in the heap 152,984 bytes copied during GC (scavenged) 8,448 bytes copied during GC (not scavenged) 86,808 bytes maximum residency (1 sample(s))
3 collections in generation 0 ( 0.00s) 1 collections in generation 1 ( 0.00s)
if your hypothesis is true, amount of data copied and number of generation-1 collection should be much less in the second case
Indeed. avg4: 880,935,612 bytes allocated in the heap 319,064,404 bytes copied during GC (scavenged) 318,965,812 bytes copied during GC (not scavenged) 201,080,832 bytes maximum residency (9 sample(s)) 1681 collections in generation 0 ( 1.67s) 9 collections in generation 1 ( 13.62s) avgP: 1,761,224,604 bytes allocated in the heap 714,644 bytes copied during GC (scavenged) 593,184 bytes copied during GC (not scavenged) 184,320 bytes maximum residency (2 sample(s)) 1908 collections in generation 0 ( 0.04s) 2 collections in generation 1 ( 0.00s) Allocation is cheap, copying expensive. All the best, /Josef