How Much Data Can a List Can Hold at the Maximum

How much data can a List can hold at the maximum?

It depends on the List implementation. Since you index arrays with ints, an ArrayList can't hold more than Integer.MAX_VALUE elements. A LinkedList isn't limited in the same way, though, and can contain any amount of elements.

what is the max limit of data into liststring in c#?

The maximum number of elements that can be stored in the current implementation of List<T> is, theoretically, Int32.MaxValue - just over 2 billion.

In the current Microsoft implementation of the CLR there's a 2GB maximum object size limit. (It's possible that other implementations, for example Mono, don't have this restriction.)

Your particular list contains strings, which are reference types. The size of a reference will be 4 or 8 bytes, depending on whether you're running on a 32-bit or 64-bit system. This means that the practical limit to the number of strings you could store will be roughly 536 million on 32-bit or 268 million on 64-bit.

In practice, you'll most likely run out of allocable memory before you reach those limits, especially if you're running on a 32-bit system.

What is the maximum amount of data that a String can hold in java?

Seeing as the String class' length() method returns an int value, the maximum length that would be returned by the method would be Integer.MAX_VALUE, which is 2^31 - 1 (or approximately 2 billion.)

So you can have a String of 2,147,483,647 characters, theoretically. I don't think you should need much more than that.

However, as @TedHopp has pointed out in the comments and posted in his answer, the Android system limits your heap space, going as low as 16 MB. Therefore, you'll never practically be able to reach the theoretical limit, and will max out with a String somewhere in the 4-64 million character range.

How Big can a Python List Get?

According to the source code, the maximum size of a list is PY_SSIZE_T_MAX/sizeof(PyObject*).

PY_SSIZE_T_MAX is defined in pyport.h to be ((size_t) -1)>>1

On a regular 32bit system, this is (4294967295 / 2) / 4 or 536870912.

Therefore the maximum size of a python list on a 32 bit system is 536,870,912 elements.

As long as the number of elements you have is equal or below this, all list functions should operate correctly.

What is the Maximum Size that an Array can hold?

System.Int32.MaxValue

Assuming you mean System.Array, ie. any normally defined array (int[], etc). This is the maximum number of values the array can hold. The size of each value is only limited by the amount of memory or virtual memory available to hold them.

This limit is enforced because System.Array uses an Int32 as it's indexer, hence only valid values for an Int32 can be used. On top of this, only positive values (ie, >= 0) may be used. This means the absolute maximum upper bound on the size of an array is the absolute maximum upper bound on values for an Int32, which is available in Int32.MaxValue and is equivalent to 2^31, or roughly 2 billion.

On a completely different note, if you're worrying about this, it's likely you're using alot of data, either correctly or incorrectly. In this case, I'd look into using a List<T> instead of an array, so that you are only using as much memory as needed. Infact, I'd recommend using a List<T> or another of the generic collection types all the time. This means that only as much memory as you are actually using will be allocated, but you can use it like you would a normal array.

The other collection of note is Dictionary<int, T> which you can use like a normal array too, but will only be populated sparsely. For instance, in the following code, only one element will be created, instead of the 1000 that an array would create:

Dictionary<int, string> foo = new Dictionary<int, string>();
foo[1000] = "Hello world!";
Console.WriteLine(foo[1000]);

Using Dictionary also lets you control the type of the indexer, and allows you to use negative values. For the absolute maximal sized sparse array you could use a Dictionary<ulong, T>, which will provide more potential elements than you could possible think about.

What's the max items in a ListT?

List<T> will be limited to the max of an array, which is 2GB (even in x64). If that isn't enough, you're using the wrong type of data storage. You can save a lot of overhead by starting it the right size, though - by passing an int to the constructor.

Re your edit - with 134217728 x Int32, that is 512MB. Remember that List<T> uses a doubling algorithm; if you are drip-feeding items via Add (without allocating all the space first) it is going to try to double to 1GB (on top of the 512MB you're already holding, the rest of your app, and of course the CLR runtime and libraries). I'm assuming you're on x86, so you already have a 2GB limit per process, and it is likely that you have fragmented your "large object heap" to death while adding items.

Personally, yes, it sounds about right to start getting an out-of-memory at this point.

---

Edit: in .NET 4.5, arrays larger than 2GB are allowed if the <gcAllowVeryLargeObjects> switch is enabled. The limit then is 2^31 items. This might be useful for arrays of references (8 bytes each in x64), or an array of large structs.

Maximum size of HashSet, Vector, LinkedList

There is no specified maximum size of these structures.

The actual practical size limit is probably somewhere in the region of Integer.MAX_VALUE (i.e. 2147483647, roughly 2 billion elements), as that's the maximum size of an array in Java.

• A HashSet uses a HashMap internally, so it has the same maximum size as that
  
  
  • A HashMap uses an array which always has a size that is a power of two, so it can be at most 2³⁰ = 1073741824 elements big (since the next power of two is bigger than Integer.MAX_VALUE).
  • Normally the number of elements is at most the number of buckets multiplied by the load factor (0.75 by default). However, when the HashMap stops resizing, then it will still allow you to add elements, exploiting the fact that each bucket is managed via a linked list. Therefore the only limit for elements in a HashMap/HashSet is memory.
• A Vector uses an array internally which has a maximum size of exactly Integer.MAX_VALUE, so it can't support more than that many elements
• A LinkedList doesn't use an array as the underlying storage, so that doesn't limit the size. It uses a classical doubly linked list structure with no inherent limit, so its size is only bounded by the available memory. Note that a LinkedList will report the size wrongly if it is bigger than Integer.MAX_VALUE, because it uses a int field to store the size and the return type of size() is int as well.

Note that while the Collection API does define how a Collection with more than Integer.MAX_VALUE elements should behave. Most importantly it states this the size() documentation:

If this collection contains more than Integer.MAX_VALUE elements, returns Integer.MAX_VALUE.

Note that while HashMap, HashSet and LinkedList seem to support more than Integer.MAX_VALUE elements, none of those implement the size() method in this way (i.e. they simply let the internal size field overflow).

This leads me to believe that other operations also aren't well-defined in this condition.

So I'd say it's safe to use those general-purpose collections with up to Integer.MAX_VLAUE elements. If you know that you'll need to store more than that, then you should switch to dedicated collection implementations that actually support this.

Theoretical limit for number of keys (objects) that can be stored in a HashMap?

Is there a theoretical limit for the number of key entries that can be stored in a HashMap or does it purely depend on the heapmemory available ?

Looking at the documentation of that class, I would say that the theoretical limit is Integer.MAX_VALUE (2³¹-1 = 2147483647) elements.

This is because to properly implement this class, the size() method is obliged to return an int representing the number of key/value pairs.

From the documentation of HashMap.size()

Returns: the number of key-value mappings in this map

Note: This question is very similar to How many data a list can hold at the maximum.

---

which data structure is the best to store a very large number of objects(say several hundred thousand objects)?

I would say it depends on what you need to store and what type of access you require. All built in collections are probably well optimized for large quantities.

Do Java arrays have a maximum size?

Using

OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 15.0.2+7, mixed mode, sharing)

... on MacOS, the answer seems to be Integer.MAX_VALUE - 2. Once you go beyond that:

cat > Foo.java << "END"
public class Foo {
  public static void main(String[] args) {
    boolean[] array = new boolean[Integer.MAX_VALUE - 1]; // too big
  }
}
END
java -Xmx4g Foo.java

... you get:

Exception in thread "main" java.lang.OutOfMemoryError:
  Requested array size exceeds VM limit

---

Related Topics