Bug 1369822

Summary: Remove usage of python warnings module
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization Manager Reporter: guy chen <guchen>
Component: vdsmAssignee: Francesco Romani <fromani>
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE QA Contact: eberman
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: 4.0.2CC: aslaikov, bazulay, eberman, eedri, fromani, gklein, lsurette, mgoldboi, michal.skrivanek, srevivo, ycui, ykaul
Target Milestone: ovirt-4.0.5Keywords: Performance
Target Release: 4.0.5   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2016-11-17 13:34:34 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: Virt RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:

Description guy chen 2016-08-24 13:32:50 UTC 
Description of problem:

I have created 111 VMS on 1 host and turned them on.
After the VMS where up, the VDSM process took 300 MB of RAM.
Now, 6 day's later, with the system idle - no actions are done on the engine or the VMS, the VDSM takes ~630 GB of RAM as seen below :

PID USER      PR  NI    VIRT    RES    SHR S  %CPU %MEM     TIME+ COMMAND                                                                                                                                          
18100 vdsm    0   -20  9980.2m 634340  11260 S  14.1  1.0 379:42.58 vdsm 


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

VDSM = 4.18.11

How reproducible:
100%

Steps to Reproduce:
1.create 111 VDSM
2.measure the VDSM memory after 6 day's

Actual results:
VDSM memory doubled it's size in 6 days time.

Expected results:
after VMS are up, VDSM memory should stay the same.

Additional info:
No errors are seen at the VDSM logs.
Comment 2 Francesco Romani 2016-08-24 15:33:38 UTC 
we know for sure we have more usage of the warnings module, so we could have more instances, albeit less serious, of the problem which caused
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1364149

Let's start from there.
Comment 5 Michal Skrivanek 2016-08-25 10:12:52 UTC 
AFAIU this is not as serious as bug 1364149
Comment 6 guy chen 2016-08-25 11:20:08 UTC 
yes, the memory leak trend is not as bad as it was on bug 1364149
Comment 7 Michal Skrivanek 2016-09-09 09:13:46 UTC 
do we want any more patches?
Comment 8 guy chen 2016-10-25 10:28:35 UTC 
Tested latest 4.0.5 system, VDSM memory started at 360 MB, checked the system after 10 day's and VDSM is stable around 390 MB, thus Bug is verified.