Maximum JVM heap size greater than 1.8GB will prevent ColdFusion M

Discussion in 'Windows 64bit' started by =?Utf-8?B?U2NvdHQgQ3VtbWlucw==?=, May 8, 2007.

  1. Good day Gentlemen (and ladies)

    I havs some developers here who are working on a new product and they have
    run into a road block, I have posted the error and the JAVA fix below


    Issue
    If a maximum heap size of 1.8GB or greater is entered in the Macromedia
    ColdFusion MX Administrator's Java/JVM Settings page and the change is
    submitted, you will receive a message stating the server must be restarted in
    order for the change to take effect. The attempt to restart the server will
    fail and the following message will be displayed:

    Windows:
    Windows could not start the ColdFusion MX Application Server on Local
    Computer. For more information, review the System Event Log. If this
    is a non-Microsoft service, contact the service vendor, and refer to
    service-specific error code 2.

    On 32-bit processor machines, the largest contiguous memory address space
    the operating system can allocate to a process is 1.8GB. Because of this, the
    maximum heap size can only be set up to 1.8GB. On 64-bit processor machines,
    the 1.8 GB limit does not apply, as 64-bit processor machines have a larger
    memory address space.

    Solution
    To correct this issue, the jvm.config file must be modified:

    Open the cf_root/runtime/bin/jvm.config file in a text editor.
    Locate the section labeled "# Arguments to VM".
    Modify the -Xmx variable to set a maximum heap size less than 1.8GB.

    For example: -Xmx1024m
    Save the file.
    Restart ColdFusion.


    Now, My Question is : Can I load a 32 bit machine with the 64 bit O/S and
    remedy this situation or is this possible the fact that it is using 64 bit
    word or will the O/S allow the Maximum heap size to be larger despite the
    fact that it is a 32 bit processor

    --
    Scott A Cummins
    Sr. Systems Engineer
    Equity Analytics
    ( A division of Merrill Lynch)
    14614 N. Keirland Blvd
    Scottsdale, AZ 85254
    480-998-3515
    =?Utf-8?B?U2NvdHQgQ3VtbWlucw==?=, May 8, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. =?Utf-8?B?U2NvdHQgQ3VtbWlucw==?=

    Jane C Guest

    See inline:

    "Scott Cummins" <> wrote in message
    news:...


    >
    > On 32-bit processor machines, the largest contiguous memory address space
    > the operating system can allocate to a process is 1.8GB. Because of this,
    > the
    > maximum heap size can only be set up to 1.8GB. On 64-bit processor
    > machines,
    > the 1.8 GB limit does not apply, as 64-bit processor machines have a
    > larger
    > memory address space.



    > Now, My Question is : Can I load a 32 bit machine with the 64 bit O/S and
    > remedy this situation or is this possible the fact that it is using 64 bit
    > word or will the O/S allow the Maximum heap size to be larger despite the
    > fact that it is a 32 bit processor


    If you have a 32 bit processor running a 32 bit operating system, then you
    are stuck with that 1.8GB limit. If you have a 64 bit processor running a
    64 bit operating system, then the 1.8GB limit does not apply.

    You cannot install a 64 bit operating system on a 32 bit processor.

    > --
    > Scott A Cummins
    > Sr. Systems Engineer
    > Equity Analytics
    > ( A division of Merrill Lynch)
    > 14614 N. Keirland Blvd
    > Scottsdale, AZ 85254
    > 480-998-3515


    --
    Jane, not plain ;) 64 bit enabled :)
    Batteries not included. Braincell on vacation ;-)
    MVP Windows Shell/User
    Jane C, May 9, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. FishMaze

    Re: Sony F828 at ISO greater than 100

    FishMaze, Sep 2, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    19
    Views:
    536
  2. Jimmy Smith
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    918
    Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)
    Jul 27, 2004
  3. Akhtar
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    719
    Walter Roberson
    Nov 17, 2006
  4. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    887
  5. Replies:
    2
    Views:
    291
    Nik Coughlin
    Sep 19, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page