CA-183272: Improving Dom0 mem usage alert mail text

[koushikcgit]

Signed-off-by: Koushik Chakravarty koushik.chakravarty@citrix.com

[koushikcgit]

Adding @johnelse as reviewer

[johnelse]

This change looks fine. However the ticket mentions two issues:

Observed:
1. Alert description says "ratio of memory demand to physical memory is beyond 0.0%" which is not clear to understand
2. Alert priority reduced when it is generated after repeat interval

This looks like it only fixes #1 - do we need a separate ticket for #2?

[jonludlam]

I don't think the message should contain the text 'Dom0' - that's not Approved Vocabulary :-)

Perhaps we could get someone used to writing user-facing docs to write the text?

[robhoes]

"Dom0" -> "The Control Domain"?

[stephen-turner]

I've created CA-187949 for the other issue.

[johnelse]

Actually yes I agree with @robhoes, "the control domain" would be better than "dom0".

[stephen-turner]

I'm actually still confused what the message means, and what is being compared. What is the "control domain memory demand" and what is the "domain physical memory"? (Or should it be host memory?)

[koushikcgit]

This is actually calculated as (res_mem + swap_in_use) / phy_mem (using /proc/meminfo as data source).

So yes, I think its better to use "Control domain memory usage" with respect to "Control domain physical memory".

@johnelse : The issue #2 is not reproducible and this PR is to fix the issue #1 mail-alarm bit.

[stephen-turner]

So would it be accurate to say it's the amount of RAM actually in use in dom0 compared with the total amount of dom0 RAM?

[koushikcgit]

@stephen-turner Yes.

[stephen-turner]

Re issue 2, if it's really not reproducible, we should close CA-187949. However, there is a screenshot there, so it clearly happened somehow!

[stephen-turner]

OK, so next question: why does it say the "ratio ... is beyond 0%". It's always beyond 0%! Does it mean 100%, or is the number not getting passed around and defaults to zero?

[koushikcgit]

Updated.

[johnelse]

I've asked the docs team to have a look at the wording of this message.

[thomassa]

At that rate, I think we should assign the "CA" bug-ticket to the docs people and close this pull-request for the time being, until we have wording from the official word-wranglers.

[stephen-turner]

Wait a bit, I was hoping to come up with a wording we could use in the GUI.

[stephen-turner]

How about something like: "The memory required by the control domain is above x% of its allocated memory". Is that accurate?

[koushikcgit]

@stephen-turner : Makes sense to me. Do you want me to update the PR in accordance to this?

[stephen-turner]

Yes, please do.

[thomassa]

Looks good. Merging.