Add section about CPU usage in the README
See original GitHub issueJust like for the memory usage, there could be a section in the README file that demonstrates how to specify the options.
Also it looks CPU is not tracked by default, which could be confusing if a user only sets cpu_limit
:
Was there a reason to make cpu usage tracking an opt-in option?
Thanks!
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 3 years ago
- Reactions:1
- Comments:7 (7 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
Add section about CPU usage in the README · Issue #29
It's a different frontend for nbresuse that gives a more "colorful" view on the current metrics. Today I started added the CPU indicator...
Read more >init/README.md
Actions and Services implicitly declare a new section. All commands or options belong to the section most recently declared. Commands or options before...
Read more >README.md · dev · Ondrej Vysocky / meric - GitLab
Intel RAPL system to limit power consumption of the CPU, it can be controlled by MERIC, see section System parameters tuning.
Read more >HTML README Template for Fix Central packages - IBM
This solution is configured through a new configuration parameter in lsf.conf: ... The UT value is the CPU utilization exponentially averaged over.
Read more >High CPU usage on machines with Deep Security Agent
Under CPU Usage section, set the Integrity Monitoring CPU Usage Level to Low. ... Add the following information under the ds_agent.ini file: trace=*....
Read more >Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start FreeTop Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found
Top GitHub Comments
These are really nice extensions!
It looks like there is indeed some overlap between https://github.com/NERSC/jupyterlab_resuse and https://github.com/jtpio/jupyterlab-system-monitor. For the system-monitor extension I would also like to add a panel with more information so it’s not only in the top bar. The panel could contain different views for the metrics and more details.
It’s tracked in https://github.com/jtpio/jupyterlab-system-monitor/issues/24, and it’s also why I’m interested in https://github.com/yuvipanda/nbresuse/issues/31 😃
Many thanks to you and anyone involved for the work on nbresuse!
I haven’t thought too much about it, but
psutil
should be helpful for that too: https://psutil.readthedocs.io/en/latest/#psutil.net_io_countersHaving a more generic approach could indeed be useful if we want nbresuse to expose what
psutil
supports: https://psutil.readthedocs.io/en/latest/#system-related-functionsThanks for the detailed answer!
OK this sounds like the safest for now. Although cpu tracking mostly adds new attributes to the response payload, it is possible that some users expect a specific schema for the response or don’t want this metric to be shared. Also it could probably be enabled by default in a future version, maybe when bumping to 1.x.
Indeed there is already a memory item in the core status bar. Also the logic doesn’t need to change to add CPU metrics since it’s the same request to
/metrics
. So (1) should be feasible without too much effort.(3) sounds like a good idea in the long run.
As a side note, I maintain a JupyterLab extension that displays these metrics in the top area: https://github.com/jtpio/jupyterlab-system-monitor It’s a different frontend for
nbresuse
that gives a more “colorful” view on the current metrics. Today I started added the CPU indicator as well, and merge it very soon: https://github.com/jtpio/jupyterlab-system-monitor/pull/20. Both indicators share the same model / data (one request to retrieve both the memory and cpu stats). But this required rewriting some of the logic already in core lab. So (1) would indeed be very useful so other frontends can reuse the logic of the model to build alternative views.Maybe we should join efforts on this!