The reason for this issue is because we use a variable to set the memory.available parameter, and it's set to 200Mi initially. That can be set via a variable, which can be tuned in a TailoredProfile. Ultimately this is an issue in: * Our documentation: We should better document using TailedProfiles (we don't even do it very well upstream) * The content description: We should mention that it's set via a variable. thanks for reporting this!
(In reply to Juan Antonio Osorio from comment #1) > The reason for this issue is because we use a variable to set the > memory.available parameter, and it's set to 200Mi initially. That can be set > via a variable, which can be tuned in a TailoredProfile. > > Ultimately this is an issue in: > > * Our documentation: We should better document using TailedProfiles (we > don't even do it very well upstream) upstream docs PR: https://github.com/openshift/compliance-operator/pull/656 the downstream docs seem OK to me, the variable example is there: https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/openshift_container_platform/4.7/html/security_and_compliance/compliance-operator#compliance-tailored-profiles_compliance-tailor It would be nice to get feedback of what is missing? > * The content description: We should mention that it's set via a variable. I amended docs of one rule: https://github.com/ComplianceAsCode/content/pull/7100
@anowak was the information that Jakub provided sufficient?