Skip to content

NETOBSERV-2656: NOO Health: use working set memory instead of rss#2516

Open
jotak wants to merge 1 commit intonetobserv:mainfrom
jotak:working-set
Open

NETOBSERV-2656: NOO Health: use working set memory instead of rss#2516
jotak wants to merge 1 commit intonetobserv:mainfrom
jotak:working-set

Conversation

@jotak
Copy link
Member

@jotak jotak commented Mar 6, 2026

Description

Working set memory is more relevant especially for agents, as it includes kernel memory

Dependencies

n/a

Checklist

  • Does the changes in PR need specific configuration or environment set up for testing?
    • if so please describe it in PR description.
  • I have added thorough unit tests for the change.
  • QE requirements (check 1 from the list):
    • Standard QE validation, with pre-merge tests unless stated otherwise.
    • Regression tests only (e.g. refactoring with no user-facing change).
    • No QE (e.g. trivial change with high reviewer's confidence, or per agreement with the QE team).

@jotak
NOO Health: use working set memory instead of rss
debf9fe 
Working set memory is more relevant especially for agents, as it
includes kernel memory
@jotak jotak added the needs-review Tells that the PR needs a review label Mar 6, 2026
@jotak jotak changed the title NOO Health: use working set memory instead of rss NETOBSERV-2656: NOO Health: use working set memory instead of rss Mar 9, 2026
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

openshift-ci-robot commented Mar 9, 2026 •
edited by openshift-ci bot
Loading

@jotak: This pull request references NETOBSERV-2656 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the bug to target the "4.22.0" version, but no target version was set.

Details

In response to this:

Description

Working set memory is more relevant especially for agents, as it includes kernel memory

Dependencies

n/a

Checklist

  • Does the changes in PR need specific configuration or environment set up for testing?
    • if so please describe it in PR description.
  • I have added thorough unit tests for the change.
  • QE requirements (check 1 from the list):
  • Standard QE validation, with pre-merge tests unless stated otherwise.
  • Regression tests only (e.g. refactoring with no user-facing change).
  • No QE (e.g. trivial change with high reviewer's confidence, or per agreement with the QE team).

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

@jotak
Copy link
Member Author

jotak commented Mar 9, 2026

/cherry-pick release-1.11

@openshift-cherrypick-robot
Copy link

openshift-cherrypick-robot commented Mar 9, 2026

@jotak: once the present PR merges, I will cherry-pick it on top of release-1.11 in a new PR and assign it to you.

Details

In response to this:

/cherry-pick release-1.11

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

No reviews

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

jira/valid-reference needs-review Tells that the PR needs a review

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@jotak @openshift-ci-robot @openshift-cherrypick-robot