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

doc: revise process.memoryUsage() text #36757

Merged
merged 0 commits into from
Jan 5, 2021
Merged

doc: revise process.memoryUsage() text #36757

merged 0 commits into from
Jan 5, 2021

Conversation

Trott
Copy link
Member

@Trott Trott commented Jan 3, 2021

Some general edits, but also adding an explanation of why one might
choose process.memoryUsage.rss() over process.memoryUsage().rss.

Checklist
  • make -j4 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test (Windows) passes
  • documentation is changed or added
  • commit message follows commit guidelines

@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot added doc Issues and PRs related to the documentations. process Issues and PRs related to the process subsystem. labels Jan 3, 2021
@Trott Trott requested a review from Flarna January 3, 2021 14:35
@Trott
Copy link
Member Author

Trott commented Jan 5, 2021

Landed in cfed001

@Trott Trott closed this Jan 5, 2021
@Trott Trott deleted the doc-fixup branch January 5, 2021 14:45
@Trott Trott merged commit cfed001 into nodejs:master Jan 5, 2021
danielleadams pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 12, 2021
Some general edits, but also adding an explanation of why one might
choose process.memoryUsage.rss() over process.memoryUsage().rss.

PR-URL: #36757
Reviewed-By: Gerhard Stöbich <deb2001-github@yahoo.de>
Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <targos@protonmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Gireesh Punathil <gpunathi@in.ibm.com>
Reviewed-By: Yash Ladha <yash@yashladha.in>
Reviewed-By: Daijiro Wachi <daijiro.wachi@gmail.com>
@danielleadams danielleadams mentioned this pull request Jan 12, 2021
targos pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 8, 2021
Some general edits, but also adding an explanation of why one might
choose process.memoryUsage.rss() over process.memoryUsage().rss.

PR-URL: #36757
Reviewed-By: Gerhard Stöbich <deb2001-github@yahoo.de>
Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <targos@protonmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Gireesh Punathil <gpunathi@in.ibm.com>
Reviewed-By: Yash Ladha <yash@yashladha.in>
Reviewed-By: Daijiro Wachi <daijiro.wachi@gmail.com>
BethGriggs pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 12, 2021
Some general edits, but also adding an explanation of why one might
choose process.memoryUsage.rss() over process.memoryUsage().rss.

PR-URL: #36757
Reviewed-By: Gerhard Stöbich <deb2001-github@yahoo.de>
Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <targos@protonmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Gireesh Punathil <gpunathi@in.ibm.com>
Reviewed-By: Yash Ladha <yash@yashladha.in>
Reviewed-By: Daijiro Wachi <daijiro.wachi@gmail.com>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 31, 2021
Some general edits, but also adding an explanation of why one might
choose process.memoryUsage.rss() over process.memoryUsage().rss.

PR-URL: #36757
Reviewed-By: Gerhard Stöbich <deb2001-github@yahoo.de>
Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <targos@protonmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Gireesh Punathil <gpunathi@in.ibm.com>
Reviewed-By: Yash Ladha <yash@yashladha.in>
Reviewed-By: Daijiro Wachi <daijiro.wachi@gmail.com>
foxxyz pushed a commit to foxxyz/node that referenced this pull request Oct 18, 2021
Some general edits, but also adding an explanation of why one might
choose process.memoryUsage.rss() over process.memoryUsage().rss.

PR-URL: nodejs#36757
Reviewed-By: Gerhard Stöbich <deb2001-github@yahoo.de>
Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <targos@protonmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Gireesh Punathil <gpunathi@in.ibm.com>
Reviewed-By: Yash Ladha <yash@yashladha.in>
Reviewed-By: Daijiro Wachi <daijiro.wachi@gmail.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
doc Issues and PRs related to the documentations. process Issues and PRs related to the process subsystem.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants