<p dir="ltr">OK,<br>
Thanks for the helpfull information. Learned something more again!</p>
<p dir="ltr">Kind regards,<br>
Koen</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Feb 12, 2014 5:22 PM, "Doron Fediuck" <<a href="mailto:dfediuck@redhat.com">dfediuck@redhat.com</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
<br>
----- Original Message -----<br>
> From: "René Koch" <<a href="mailto:rkoch@linuxland.at">rkoch@linuxland.at</a>><br>
> To: "Koen Vanoppen" <<a href="mailto:vanoppen.koen@gmail.com">vanoppen.koen@gmail.com</a>><br>
> Cc: <a href="mailto:users@ovirt.org">users@ovirt.org</a><br>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2014 4:18:37 PM<br>
> Subject: Re: [Users] Memory usage<br>
><br>
> On Wed, 2014-02-12 at 15:14 +0100, Koen Vanoppen wrote:<br>
> > In The GUI, it says it's using 25% of the memory.<br>
><br>
><br>
> I guess it's the real value, right?<br>
> The same happened for the memcached vm, someone reported to me -<br>
> negative value in REST-API, but correct graph in oVirt webadmin GUI.<br>
><br>
> I fear I have no idea how this can happen - so maybe someone else can<br>
> help you troubleshoot this issue.<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > 2014-02-12 15:10 GMT+01:00 Koen Vanoppen <<a href="mailto:vanoppen.koen@gmail.com">vanoppen.koen@gmail.com</a>>:<br>
> > Thanks for the quick respons, but there is no memcached<br>
> > running on that VM.<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > Kind regards<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > 2014-02-12 15:06 GMT+01:00 René Koch <<a href="mailto:rkoch@linuxland.at">rkoch@linuxland.at</a>>:<br>
> ><br>
> > On Wed, 2014-02-12 at 14:55 +0100, Koen Vanoppen<br>
> > wrote:<br>
> > > Dear all,<br>
> > ><br>
> > ><br>
> > > When we monitor one of our machines, we noticed that<br>
> > there was one vm<br>
> > > that was constantly giving a error of memory usage.<br>
> > But when we took a<br>
> > > look at it, there is actually nothing wrong with it.<br>
> > Now we looked<br>
> > > furhter then that. We looked at the API of the<br>
> > machine and noticed<br>
> > > something very strange:<br>
> > ><br>
> > > <statistic<br>
> > ><br>
> > href="/api/vms/3b9aa245-75ff-42e8-b921-1c9ce61826bf/statistics/b7499508-c1c3-32f0-8174-c1783e57bb08"<br>
> > id="b7499508-c1c3-32f0-8174-c1783e57bb08"><name>memory.used</name><description>Memory<br>
> > used (agent)</description><values<br>
> > type="INTEGER"><value><datum>-944892806</datum></value></values><type>GAUGE</type><unit>BYTES</unit><br>
> > ><br>
> > ><br>
> > > It's a negative...<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > Do you have memcached running in this vm?<br>
> ><br>
> > I heard about this issue with memcached, but never<br>
> > tested memcached in<br>
> > my oVirt environment. You get the real usage value<br>
> > with<br>
> > memory.used = memory.installed + memory.used<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > Regards,<br>
> > René<br>
> ><br>
> > ><br>
> > ><br>
> > > What could be the problem?<br>
> > ><br>
> > ><br>
> > > Kind regards,<br>
> > ><br>
> > > koen<br>
> > ><br>
> ><br>
<br>
Guys,<br>
these values are usually a result of overcommitment mechanism usage.<br>
For example, if KSM is effective, it will free a lot of memory pages,<br>
and total-free-committed becomes negative.<br>
<br>
This was reported in <a href="https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=977758" target="_blank">https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=977758</a><br>
and the engine is using memFree reported by vdsm, which is more accurate.<br>
<br>
The API reports the old version due to backwards compatibility.<br>
<br>
Doron<br>
<br>
P.S.<br>
René- thanks for helping!<br>
</blockquote></div>