Finalizers are not your friend
Objects with finalizers (those that have a non-trivial finalize()
method) have significant overhead compared to objects without
finalizers, and should be used sparingly. Finalizeable objects are both
slower to allocate and slower to collect. At allocation time, the JVM
must register any finalizeable objects with the garbage collector, and
(at least in the HotSpot JVM implementation) finalizeable objects must
follow a slower allocation
path than most other objects. Similarly, finalizeable objects are
slower to collect, too. It takes at least two garbage collection cycles
(in the best case) before a finalizeable object can be reclaimed, and
the garbage collector has to do extra work to invoke the finalizer. The
result is more time spent allocating and collecting objects and more
pressure on the garbage collector, because the memory used by
unreachable finalizeable objects is retained longer. Combine that with
the fact that finalizers are not guaranteed to run in any predictable
timeframe, or even at all, and you can see that there are relatively
few situations for which finalization is the right tool to use.
If you must use finalizers, there are a few guidelines you can follow that will help contain the damage. Limit the number of finalizeable objects, which will minimize the number of objects that have to incur the allocation and collection costs of finalization. Organize your classes so that finalizeable objects hold no other data, which will minimize the amount of memory tied up in finalizeable objects after they become unreachable, as there can be a long delay before they are actually reclaimed. In particular, beware when extending finalizeable classes from standard libraries.
View Java theory and practice: Garbage collection and performance Discussion
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next Page: Helping the garbage collector . . . not