I had a client who upgraded from 10.3.1 to 10.5.1 few months ago and they reported that the memory usage on the server has increased. There has not been any change in the server configuration or number of services on the server and they are running their servers in a virtualized environment. I believe that they are also having multiple clusters within the site and thus not utilizing the single cluster mode option. Is this expected behaviour after the upgrade?
How much of an increase are they seeing?
ArcGIS Server 10.5 has some new System services that run that could be adding to the memory usage, although it should be a negligible amount.
they are seeing between 10-25Gb increase in memory usage. Their configuration is such that there are multiple clusters within the site, 1 for map services and another for GP services. Will such configuration cause increase in memory usage since ArcGIS server has moved away from multiple clusters in 10.5.1?
10-25GB additional memory utilization is a lot. Is that *per machine*? Or, aggregated across all machines (in all clusters) in the Site? I cannot imagine a release-based change that would lead to that magnitude of difference in memory consumption. Something else is going on.Did they see this same pattern in pre-production when they did the upgrade there?
10-25Gb increase is per machine. So on 1 machine, it could be 10Gb, and another machine is seeing 25Gb increase in memory. They did mention that they increase the SOC and App Server heap size though, but they did not mention if it was done before or after the upgrade.
Increasing the SOC heap size is the most likely suspect for that kind of memory growth, based on what you've described.
Increasing the heap size delays Java garbage collection. That can be necessary in some special circumstances. But, the need is not very common. And, when it occurs, it is unlikely to be needed for all services. Ideally, services that need the larger SOC heap size should be segregated to their own machines (with an appropriate heap size on those machines). The other services should be left on machines with the default heap size.
What reasoning led them to increase the heap sizes (for the App Server and SOC heaps)? What are the new heap size values? And, how did they determine that the heap sizes are not larger than necessary? (Larger heap sizes must use more memory. Larger-than-necessary heap sizes use more memory than is necessary. So, the question is whether they are using the memory that they should have been all along or if they have caused themselves to become memory inefficient.)
We seem to have similiar problem with a customer that wants to change from server 10.3 to 10.5.1.
After installing Server 10.5.1 on a new virtual machine the performance of dynamic map-services has decreased.
The datastore (fgdb's) and published map services are exactly the same. Yet on the old server (also a vm) images from map-services are created twice as fast.
We tested both vm's perfomance with the linpac test and microsofts diskspd tool. The new vm performed significantly better in all tests.
The only difference between the servers is the operating system. The old one uses Win Server 2012 and the new one Server 2016. Otherwise the servers are quite the same. No additional software like databases, plenty of unused ram and pagefiles in the 8GB range.
Heap Sizes for ArcGIS Server is 256 MB in both cases.
Is there something special to the 10.5.1 version in regards to performance limiting factors as opposed to the 10.3 version?
I also saw this. We went from 10.2.2 to 10.5.1, and then 10.6.1. Same gdb's and mxd's. Same Amazon machine configuration. 2 CPU and 8 gig RAM. It only runs a handful of services and each one is only 200 meg RAM. Literally for now it's only running one website. Same as with you TOPO GRAPHICS, we did go from Win 2012 R2 to 2016.
We saw a serious decrease in performance and increase in CPU and RAM usage. On 10.5 and 10.6.x. I'm investigating but thus far this is concerning. I have turned off anything that wasn't needed. Even turned off SQL Server (wasn't needed but was on old instance). So in fact it should run faster, there's a few less things on it.
Les membres connectés peuvent publier, suivre les mises à jour, et plus encore. Nouveau ici ? Inscrivez-vous gratuitement.
Find useful guides, FAQs, and documents to help you navigate and make the most of Esri Community.
