linux fork的缺点

Disadvantage of fork

linux环境下, JBoss中调用curl下载文件,  发现curl占用的内存和JBoss一样多。

Historical Background and Problem Description

Traditionally, Unix has had only one way to create a new process: using a fork() system call, often followed by an exec() system call. The fork() call makes a copy of the entire parent process' address space, and exec() turns that copy into a new process.

(Note: In the Solaris OS, the term swap space is used to describe a combination of physical memory and disk swap space configured for the system. However, with other Unix systems this term may mean swap space on disk, also known as backing store. To avoid any confusion, I'll use the term Virtual Memory (VM) to mean physical memory plus disk swap space.)

Generally, the fork/exec method has worked quite well. However, it has disadvantages in some cases, such as running out of memory without a good reason and poor fork performance.

Out of Memory: For a large-memory process, the fork() system call can fail due to an inadequate amount of VM, because fork() requires twice the amount of the parent memory. This can happen even when fork() is immediately followed by an exec() call that would release most of that extra memory. When this happens, the application will usually terminate.

For example, suppose a 64-bit application is consuming 6 gigabytes (Gbytes) of VM at the moment, and it needs to create a subprocess to run the ls(1) command. The parent process issues a fork() call that will succeed only if there is another 6 Gbytes of VM available at the moment. If the system doesn't have that much VM available (which is a frequent situation), fork() will fail with ENOMEM. Obviously, the ls(1) command doesn't need anywhere near 6 Gbytes of memory to run, but fork() doesn't know that.

Not only applications, but also Sun's own tools can suffer from the same problem. For example, the following Sun RFE (request for enhancement) has been filed for dbx: "4748951 dbx shell should use posix_spawn() for non-builtin commands rather than fork(2)".

RFE 4748951 came about when a customer's utility invoked dbx to read a huge core file using a script that also needed to run a cut(1) command from within dbx. They got a cannot fork - try again error message causing dbx to abort. An investigation revealed that dbx used fork/exec to execute that tiny cut(1) command and ran out of VM during the fork() call.

The Solaris Java Virtual Machine (JVM) is also suffering from the same problem currently, as described in this Sun RFE: "5049299 Use posix_spawn, not fork, on S10 to avoid swap exhaustion".

From what Linux kernel/libc version is Java Runtime.exec() safe with regards to memory?