在回答了一个关于如何使用System.gc()在Java中强制释放对象的问题(这个人正在清除1.5GB的HashMap)后，我被告知手动调用System.gc()是一种糟糕的做法，但评论并不完全令人信服。此外，似乎没有人敢对我的回答投赞成票，也没有人敢投反对票。
我在那里被告知这是一种糟糕的做法，但后来我又被告知垃圾收集器的运行不再系统地停止整个世界，而且JVM也只能有效地将其用作提示，所以我有点不知所措。
我知道JVM通常比您更了解何时需要回收内存。我也明白，担心几千字节的数据是愚蠢的。我也明白，即使是兆字节的数据也不如几年前了。但还是1.5 gb ?你知道大概有1.5 GB的数据在内存中;这又不是瞎猜的。System.gc()在系统上是坏的，还是在某个点上变得正常了?
所以这个问题实际上是双重的
Why is or isn't it bad practice to call System.gc()? Is it really merely a hint to the JVM under certain implementations, or is it always a full collection cycle? Are there really garbage collector implementations that can do their work without stopping the world? Please shed some light over the various assertions people have made in the comments to my answer.
Where's the threshold? Is it never a good idea to call System.gc(), or are there times when it's acceptable? If so, what are those times?
Since objects are dynamically allocated by using the new operator,
you might be wondering how such objects are destroyed and their
memory released for later reallocation.
In some languages, such as C++, dynamically allocated objects must
be manually released by use of a delete operator.
Java takes a different approach; it handles deallocation for you
automatically.
The technique that accomplishes this is called garbage collection.
It works like this: when no references to an object exist, that object is assumed to be no longer needed, and the memory occupied by the object can be reclaimed. There is no explicit need to destroy objects as in C++.
Garbage collection only occurs sporadically (if at all) during the
execution of your program.
It will not occur simply because one or more objects exist that are
no longer used.
Furthermore, different Java run-time implementations will take
varying approaches to garbage collection, but for the most part, you
should not have to think about it while writing your programs.
首先，规范和现实之间是有区别的。规范说System.gc()提示GC应该运行，VM可以忽略它。实际情况是，VM永远不会忽略对System.gc()的调用。
Calling GC comes with a non-trivial overhead to the call and if you do this at some random point in time it's likely you'll see no reward for your efforts. On the other hand, a naturally triggered collection is very likely to recoup the costs of the call. If you have information that indicates that a GC should be run than you can make the call to System.gc() and you should see benefits. However, it's my experience that this happens only in a few edge cases as it's very unlikely that you'll have enough information to understand if and when System.gc() should be called.
这里列出了一个例子，在IDE中敲击垃圾桶。如果你要去开会，为什么不去呢?开销不会影响您，当您返回时，可能会清理堆。在生产系统中执行此操作，频繁调用收集将使其彻底停止!即使是RMI偶尔发出的调用也会对性能造成破坏。
前面已经解释过，调用system.gc()可能什么都不做，任何“需要”垃圾收集器运行的代码都是坏的。
然而，调用System.gc()是一种糟糕的实践，其实际原因是它效率低下。在最坏的情况下，它的效率非常低!让我解释一下。
典型的GC算法通过遍历堆中的所有非垃圾对象来识别垃圾，并推断任何未访问的对象都必须是垃圾。由此，我们可以对垃圾收集的总工作进行建模，其中一部分与活动数据量成正比，另一部分与垃圾量成正比;即工作=(生活* W1 +垃圾* W2)。
现在假设您在单线程应用程序中执行以下操作。
System.gc(); System.gc();
第一个调用将(我们预测)做(活* W1 +垃圾* W2)工作，并摆脱未处理的垃圾。
第二个调用将执行(live* W1 + 0 * W2)工作，并且不回收任何东西。换句话说，我们做了(活的)工作，却一事无成。
我们可以将收集器的效率建模为收集一个单位垃圾所需的工作量;即效率=(活* W1 +垃圾* W2) /垃圾。因此，为了使GC尽可能高效，我们需要在运行GC时最大化垃圾的价值;也就是说，一直等到堆满。(并且，使堆尽可能大。但这是另一个话题。)
如果应用程序不进行干预(通过调用System.gc())， GC将等到堆满才运行，从而有效地收集garbage1。但是，如果应用程序强制GC运行，则堆可能不会满，结果将是垃圾收集效率低下。应用程序强制GC的频率越高，GC的效率就越低。
注意:上面的解释掩盖了一个事实，即典型的现代GC将堆划分为“空间”，GC可能会动态扩展堆，应用程序的非垃圾对象的工作集可能会变化等等。即便如此，同样的基本原则也适用于所有真正的垃圾收集器2。强制GC运行效率很低。
1 -这就是“吞吐量”收集器的工作原理。并发收集器(如CMS和G1)使用不同的标准来决定何时启动垃圾收集器。
2 -我也排除了专门使用引用计数的内存管理器，但目前没有Java实现使用这种方法…理由很充分。
人们已经很好地解释了为什么不使用它，所以我将告诉你一些你应该使用它的情况:
(下面的评论适用于在带有CMS收集器的Linux上运行的Hotspot，在这里我有信心地说System.gc()实际上总是调用完整的垃圾收集)。
After the initial work of starting up your application, you may be a terrible state of memory usage. Half your tenured generation could be full of garbage, meaning that you are that much closer to your first CMS. In applications where that matters, it is not a bad idea to call System.gc() to "reset" your heap to the starting state of live data.
Along the same lines as #1, if you monitor your heap usage closely, you want to have an accurate reading of what your baseline memory usage is. If the first 2 minutes of your application's uptime is all initialization, your data is going to be messed up unless you force (ahem... "suggest") the full gc up front.
You may have an application that is designed to never promote anything to the tenured generation while it is running. But maybe you need to initialize some data up-front that is not-so-huge as to automatically get moved to the tenured generation. Unless you call System.gc() after everything is set up, your data could sit in the new generation until the time comes for it to get promoted. All of a sudden your super-duper low-latency, low-GC application gets hit with a HUGE (relatively speaking, of course) latency penalty for promoting those objects during normal operations.
It is sometimes useful to have a System.gc call available in a production application for verifying the existence of a memory leak. If you know that the set of live data at time X should exist in a certain ratio to the set of live data at time Y, then it could be useful to call System.gc() a time X and time Y and compare memory usage.
