Hacker News Reader

Isn't that just risking a crash? Why not just allocate a 300GB heap and hope GC kicks in rarely?

Hoping the GC kicks in rarely is not a great strategy. Usually when I see something like this the developers have gone out of their way to write garbage-free code (see Coral Blocks for an example of this.)

If a code is truly garbage free (not sure how practical this is) won't it be independent of the heap size ? I know some teams do claim to write garbage free code to prevent GC from ever kicking of.

Yeah, actually I think you're right. I don't think you can actually disable the GC in JVM unless you patch it.

Truly garbage free is probably not practical 99% of the time. Normally you should just generally try to either have objects that are short-lived or practically permanent.

Agree, you want the GC sipping constantly, not gulping, or embarrassingly pulling up its pants.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com