Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[GAPRINDASHVILI][POC] Store unique set size (USS) in the PSS column #314

Conversation

jrafanie
Copy link
Member

@jrafanie jrafanie commented Nov 15, 2017

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1479356

Unique set size is a better way to detect workers that are growing
unbounded since any memory/reference leaks would be shown in their
uss. If the server process is large when forking, new workers would
inherit a big pss immediately.

We should really rename the column/hash key to uss.

Related PRs:
master
gaprindashvili
fine
euwe

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1479356

Unique set size is a better way to detect workers that are growing
unbounded since any memory/reference leaks would be shown in their
uss.  If the server process is large when forking, new workers would
inherit a big pss immediately.

We should really rename the column/hash key to uss.
@jrafanie jrafanie force-pushed the gaprindashvili_hack_uss_in_pss_column branch from 7c1273e to d155970 Compare November 15, 2017 19:10
@miq-bot
Copy link
Member

miq-bot commented Nov 15, 2017

Checked commit jrafanie@d155970 with ruby 2.3.3, rubocop 0.47.1, haml-lint 0.20.0, and yamllint 1.10.0
1 file checked, 0 offenses detected
Everything looks fine. ⭐

@jrafanie jrafanie changed the title [GAPRINDASHVILI] Store unique set size (USS) in the PSS column [GAPRINDASHVILI][POC] Store unique set size (USS) in the PSS column Nov 15, 2017
@jrafanie
Copy link
Member Author

For gaprindashvili and master, we should use ManageIQ/manageiq#16570 instead

@jrafanie jrafanie closed this Nov 30, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants