-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.3k
Fix host metrics on overprovisioning change #12403
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
base: 4.20
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
|
@blueorangutan package |
|
@vishesh92 a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with no SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress. |
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## 4.20 #12403 +/- ##
============================================
+ Coverage 16.23% 17.76% +1.52%
- Complexity 13381 15862 +2481
============================================
Files 5657 5923 +266
Lines 498947 530544 +31597
Branches 60555 64830 +4275
============================================
+ Hits 81025 94262 +13237
- Misses 408889 425736 +16847
- Partials 9033 10546 +1513
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Pull request overview
This PR fixes a bug where host CPU and memory usage metrics were incorrectly affected by overprovisioning factor changes. The issue caused metrics (Prometheus exporter's cloudstack_host_cpu_usage_mhz_total and API's listHosts response field cpuused) to report incorrect values when overprovisioning factors were modified.
Changes:
- Removed overprovisioning factor calculations from used CPU and memory metrics
- Removed overprovisioning factor calculations from reserved CPU and memory metrics
💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.
|
@vishesh92 , should this be based off of 4.20? |
|
Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ el10 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 16331 |
DaanHoogland
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
clgtm
Description
Fixes #7591
Types of changes
Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity
Feature/Enhancement Scale
Bug Severity
Screenshots (if appropriate):
How Has This Been Tested?
How did you try to break this feature and the system with this change?