[jira] [Updated] (GEODE-8859) Redis data structures may not accurately reflect their size in Geode stats

2022-02-08 Thread Anthony Baker (Jira)


 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-8859?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Anthony Baker updated GEODE-8859:
-
Labels: pull-request-available unreleased  (was: pull-request-available)

> Redis data structures may not accurately reflect their size in Geode stats
> --
>
> Key: GEODE-8859
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-8859
> Project: Geode
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Components: redis, statistics
>Affects Versions: 1.14.0
>Reporter: Jens Deppe
>Assignee: Hale Bales
>Priority: Major
>  Labels: pull-request-available, unreleased
> Fix For: 1.15.0
>
>
> Here is a comment from Darrel regarding this issue. For some background, the 
> Redis structures implement {{Delta}}.
>  
> {quote}I was playing around with RedisInsight and was able to get most the 
> the overview dashboard and the data browser working with geode redis. But I 
> found a problem with how we are using geode that causes the geode stats that 
> track how much data is stored in a partitioned region to be wrong and the 
> bucket sizes used for rebalancing are also wrong. Basically when we do create 
> ops on the region the stats track it okay. But when we do updates then geode 
> always thinks that nothing (size wise) changed. So for example I created a 
> string by doing a redis “set” command. I saw the size of the string accounted 
> for in dataStoreBytesInUse. But then I kept doing redis “append” commands on 
> that key and the dataStoreBytesInUse did not change at all. I think the 
> problem is in how we are updating the data structure in place instead of 
> getting a copy, modifying it, and then putting the copy into the region. 
> Avoiding this copy gives us MUCH better performance but it messes up geode 
> when it is trying to calculate the memory increase or decrease. It is 
> possible that this is only an issue on the primary and that the secondary 
> sizing may be correct. If so that could lead to other problems because for a 
> given bucket our primary size would be different than the secondary. The 
> bucket sizes are used when you do a rebalance but basically we can have a 
> bunch of memory that is “untracked” so we might see the JVM heaps unbalanced 
> but geode will think the buckets are balanced. I’m not sure what we should do 
> about this.
> {quote}



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.1#820001)


[jira] [Updated] (GEODE-8859) Redis data structures may not accurately reflect their size in Geode stats

2021-06-02 Thread Owen Nichols (Jira)


 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-8859?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Owen Nichols updated GEODE-8859:

Labels: pull-request-available  (was: pull-request-available 
release-blocker)

> Redis data structures may not accurately reflect their size in Geode stats
> --
>
> Key: GEODE-8859
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-8859
> Project: Geode
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Components: redis, statistics
>Affects Versions: 1.14.0
>Reporter: Jens Deppe
>Assignee: Hale Bales
>Priority: Major
>  Labels: pull-request-available
> Fix For: 1.15.0
>
>
> Here is a comment from Darrel regarding this issue. For some background, the 
> Redis structures implement {{Delta}}.
>  
> {quote}I was playing around with RedisInsight and was able to get most the 
> the overview dashboard and the data browser working with geode redis. But I 
> found a problem with how we are using geode that causes the geode stats that 
> track how much data is stored in a partitioned region to be wrong and the 
> bucket sizes used for rebalancing are also wrong. Basically when we do create 
> ops on the region the stats track it okay. But when we do updates then geode 
> always thinks that nothing (size wise) changed. So for example I created a 
> string by doing a redis “set” command. I saw the size of the string accounted 
> for in dataStoreBytesInUse. But then I kept doing redis “append” commands on 
> that key and the dataStoreBytesInUse did not change at all. I think the 
> problem is in how we are updating the data structure in place instead of 
> getting a copy, modifying it, and then putting the copy into the region. 
> Avoiding this copy gives us MUCH better performance but it messes up geode 
> when it is trying to calculate the memory increase or decrease. It is 
> possible that this is only an issue on the primary and that the secondary 
> sizing may be correct. If so that could lead to other problems because for a 
> given bucket our primary size would be different than the secondary. The 
> bucket sizes are used when you do a rebalance but basically we can have a 
> bunch of memory that is “untracked” so we might see the JVM heaps unbalanced 
> but geode will think the buckets are balanced. I’m not sure what we should do 
> about this.
> {quote}



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)


[jira] [Updated] (GEODE-8859) Redis data structures may not accurately reflect their size in Geode stats

2021-05-13 Thread Dan Smith (Jira)


 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-8859?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Dan Smith updated GEODE-8859:
-
Labels: pull-request-available release-blocker  (was: blocks-1.14.0​ 
pull-request-available release-blocker)

> Redis data structures may not accurately reflect their size in Geode stats
> --
>
> Key: GEODE-8859
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-8859
> Project: Geode
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Components: redis, statistics
>Affects Versions: 1.14.0
>Reporter: Jens Deppe
>Assignee: Hale Bales
>Priority: Major
>  Labels: pull-request-available, release-blocker
>
> Here is a comment from Darrel regarding this issue. For some background, the 
> Redis structures implement {{Delta}}.
>  
> {quote}I was playing around with RedisInsight and was able to get most the 
> the overview dashboard and the data browser working with geode redis. But I 
> found a problem with how we are using geode that causes the geode stats that 
> track how much data is stored in a partitioned region to be wrong and the 
> bucket sizes used for rebalancing are also wrong. Basically when we do create 
> ops on the region the stats track it okay. But when we do updates then geode 
> always thinks that nothing (size wise) changed. So for example I created a 
> string by doing a redis “set” command. I saw the size of the string accounted 
> for in dataStoreBytesInUse. But then I kept doing redis “append” commands on 
> that key and the dataStoreBytesInUse did not change at all. I think the 
> problem is in how we are updating the data structure in place instead of 
> getting a copy, modifying it, and then putting the copy into the region. 
> Avoiding this copy gives us MUCH better performance but it messes up geode 
> when it is trying to calculate the memory increase or decrease. It is 
> possible that this is only an issue on the primary and that the secondary 
> sizing may be correct. If so that could lead to other problems because for a 
> given bucket our primary size would be different than the secondary. The 
> bucket sizes are used when you do a rebalance but basically we can have a 
> bunch of memory that is “untracked” so we might see the JVM heaps unbalanced 
> but geode will think the buckets are balanced. I’m not sure what we should do 
> about this.
> {quote}



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)


[jira] [Updated] (GEODE-8859) Redis data structures may not accurately reflect their size in Geode stats

2021-04-05 Thread Nabarun Nag (Jira)


 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-8859?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Nabarun Nag updated GEODE-8859:
---
Fix Version/s: (was: 1.15.0)
   (was: 1.14.0)

> Redis data structures may not accurately reflect their size in Geode stats
> --
>
> Key: GEODE-8859
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-8859
> Project: Geode
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Components: redis, statistics
>Affects Versions: 1.14.0
>Reporter: Jens Deppe
>Assignee: John Hutchison
>Priority: Major
>  Labels: blocks-1.14.0​, pull-request-available, release-blocker
>
> Here is a comment from Darrel regarding this issue. For some background, the 
> Redis structures implement {{Delta}}.
>  
> {quote}I was playing around with RedisInsight and was able to get most the 
> the overview dashboard and the data browser working with geode redis. But I 
> found a problem with how we are using geode that causes the geode stats that 
> track how much data is stored in a partitioned region to be wrong and the 
> bucket sizes used for rebalancing are also wrong. Basically when we do create 
> ops on the region the stats track it okay. But when we do updates then geode 
> always thinks that nothing (size wise) changed. So for example I created a 
> string by doing a redis “set” command. I saw the size of the string accounted 
> for in dataStoreBytesInUse. But then I kept doing redis “append” commands on 
> that key and the dataStoreBytesInUse did not change at all. I think the 
> problem is in how we are updating the data structure in place instead of 
> getting a copy, modifying it, and then putting the copy into the region. 
> Avoiding this copy gives us MUCH better performance but it messes up geode 
> when it is trying to calculate the memory increase or decrease. It is 
> possible that this is only an issue on the primary and that the secondary 
> sizing may be correct. If so that could lead to other problems because for a 
> given bucket our primary size would be different than the secondary. The 
> bucket sizes are used when you do a rebalance but basically we can have a 
> bunch of memory that is “untracked” so we might see the JVM heaps unbalanced 
> but geode will think the buckets are balanced. I’m not sure what we should do 
> about this.
> {quote}



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)


[jira] [Updated] (GEODE-8859) Redis data structures may not accurately reflect their size in Geode stats

2021-03-08 Thread Owen Nichols (Jira)


 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-8859?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Owen Nichols updated GEODE-8859:

Fix Version/s: 1.15.0

> Redis data structures may not accurately reflect their size in Geode stats
> --
>
> Key: GEODE-8859
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-8859
> Project: Geode
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Components: redis, statistics
>Affects Versions: 1.14.0
>Reporter: Jens Deppe
>Assignee: John Hutchison
>Priority: Major
>  Labels: blocks-1.14.0​, pull-request-available, release-blocker
> Fix For: 1.15.0
>
>
> Here is a comment from Darrel regarding this issue. For some background, the 
> Redis structures implement {{Delta}}.
>  
> {quote}I was playing around with RedisInsight and was able to get most the 
> the overview dashboard and the data browser working with geode redis. But I 
> found a problem with how we are using geode that causes the geode stats that 
> track how much data is stored in a partitioned region to be wrong and the 
> bucket sizes used for rebalancing are also wrong. Basically when we do create 
> ops on the region the stats track it okay. But when we do updates then geode 
> always thinks that nothing (size wise) changed. So for example I created a 
> string by doing a redis “set” command. I saw the size of the string accounted 
> for in dataStoreBytesInUse. But then I kept doing redis “append” commands on 
> that key and the dataStoreBytesInUse did not change at all. I think the 
> problem is in how we are updating the data structure in place instead of 
> getting a copy, modifying it, and then putting the copy into the region. 
> Avoiding this copy gives us MUCH better performance but it messes up geode 
> when it is trying to calculate the memory increase or decrease. It is 
> possible that this is only an issue on the primary and that the secondary 
> sizing may be correct. If so that could lead to other problems because for a 
> given bucket our primary size would be different than the secondary. The 
> bucket sizes are used when you do a rebalance but basically we can have a 
> bunch of memory that is “untracked” so we might see the JVM heaps unbalanced 
> but geode will think the buckets are balanced. I’m not sure what we should do 
> about this.
> {quote}



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)


[jira] [Updated] (GEODE-8859) Redis data structures may not accurately reflect their size in Geode stats

2021-03-03 Thread ASF GitHub Bot (Jira)


 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-8859?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

ASF GitHub Bot updated GEODE-8859:
--
Labels: blocks-1.14.0​ pull-request-available release-blocker  (was: 
blocks-1.14.0​ release-blocker)

> Redis data structures may not accurately reflect their size in Geode stats
> --
>
> Key: GEODE-8859
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-8859
> Project: Geode
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Components: redis, statistics
>Affects Versions: 1.14.0
>Reporter: Jens Deppe
>Assignee: Raymond Ingles
>Priority: Major
>  Labels: blocks-1.14.0​, pull-request-available, release-blocker
>
> Here is a comment from Darrel regarding this issue. For some background, the 
> Redis structures implement {{Delta}}.
>  
> {quote}I was playing around with RedisInsight and was able to get most the 
> the overview dashboard and the data browser working with geode redis. But I 
> found a problem with how we are using geode that causes the geode stats that 
> track how much data is stored in a partitioned region to be wrong and the 
> bucket sizes used for rebalancing are also wrong. Basically when we do create 
> ops on the region the stats track it okay. But when we do updates then geode 
> always thinks that nothing (size wise) changed. So for example I created a 
> string by doing a redis “set” command. I saw the size of the string accounted 
> for in dataStoreBytesInUse. But then I kept doing redis “append” commands on 
> that key and the dataStoreBytesInUse did not change at all. I think the 
> problem is in how we are updating the data structure in place instead of 
> getting a copy, modifying it, and then putting the copy into the region. 
> Avoiding this copy gives us MUCH better performance but it messes up geode 
> when it is trying to calculate the memory increase or decrease. It is 
> possible that this is only an issue on the primary and that the secondary 
> sizing may be correct. If so that could lead to other problems because for a 
> given bucket our primary size would be different than the secondary. The 
> bucket sizes are used when you do a rebalance but basically we can have a 
> bunch of memory that is “untracked” so we might see the JVM heaps unbalanced 
> but geode will think the buckets are balanced. I’m not sure what we should do 
> about this.
> {quote}



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)


[jira] [Updated] (GEODE-8859) Redis data structures may not accurately reflect their size in Geode stats

2021-03-01 Thread Owen Nichols (Jira)


 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-8859?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Owen Nichols updated GEODE-8859:

Labels: blocks-1.14.0​ release-blocker  (was: release-blocker)

> Redis data structures may not accurately reflect their size in Geode stats
> --
>
> Key: GEODE-8859
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-8859
> Project: Geode
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Components: redis, statistics
>Affects Versions: 1.14.0
>Reporter: Jens Deppe
>Assignee: Raymond Ingles
>Priority: Major
>  Labels: blocks-1.14.0​, release-blocker
>
> Here is a comment from Darrel regarding this issue. For some background, the 
> Redis structures implement {{Delta}}.
>  
> {quote}I was playing around with RedisInsight and was able to get most the 
> the overview dashboard and the data browser working with geode redis. But I 
> found a problem with how we are using geode that causes the geode stats that 
> track how much data is stored in a partitioned region to be wrong and the 
> bucket sizes used for rebalancing are also wrong. Basically when we do create 
> ops on the region the stats track it okay. But when we do updates then geode 
> always thinks that nothing (size wise) changed. So for example I created a 
> string by doing a redis “set” command. I saw the size of the string accounted 
> for in dataStoreBytesInUse. But then I kept doing redis “append” commands on 
> that key and the dataStoreBytesInUse did not change at all. I think the 
> problem is in how we are updating the data structure in place instead of 
> getting a copy, modifying it, and then putting the copy into the region. 
> Avoiding this copy gives us MUCH better performance but it messes up geode 
> when it is trying to calculate the memory increase or decrease. It is 
> possible that this is only an issue on the primary and that the secondary 
> sizing may be correct. If so that could lead to other problems because for a 
> given bucket our primary size would be different than the secondary. The 
> bucket sizes are used when you do a rebalance but basically we can have a 
> bunch of memory that is “untracked” so we might see the JVM heaps unbalanced 
> but geode will think the buckets are balanced. I’m not sure what we should do 
> about this.
> {quote}



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)


[jira] [Updated] (GEODE-8859) Redis data structures may not accurately reflect their size in Geode stats

2021-01-25 Thread Jens Deppe (Jira)


 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-8859?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Jens Deppe updated GEODE-8859:
--
Affects Version/s: 1.14.0

> Redis data structures may not accurately reflect their size in Geode stats
> --
>
> Key: GEODE-8859
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-8859
> Project: Geode
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Components: redis, statistics
>Affects Versions: 1.14.0
>Reporter: Jens Deppe
>Priority: Major
>  Labels: release-blocker
>
> Here is a comment from Darrel regarding this issue. For some background, the 
> Redis structures implement {{Delta}}.
>  
> {quote}I was playing around with RedisInsight and was able to get most the 
> the overview dashboard and the data browser working with geode redis. But I 
> found a problem with how we are using geode that causes the geode stats that 
> track how much data is stored in a partitioned region to be wrong and the 
> bucket sizes used for rebalancing are also wrong. Basically when we do create 
> ops on the region the stats track it okay. But when we do updates then geode 
> always thinks that nothing (size wise) changed. So for example I created a 
> string by doing a redis “set” command. I saw the size of the string accounted 
> for in dataStoreBytesInUse. But then I kept doing redis “append” commands on 
> that key and the dataStoreBytesInUse did not change at all. I think the 
> problem is in how we are updating the data structure in place instead of 
> getting a copy, modifying it, and then putting the copy into the region. 
> Avoiding this copy gives us MUCH better performance but it messes up geode 
> when it is trying to calculate the memory increase or decrease. It is 
> possible that this is only an issue on the primary and that the secondary 
> sizing may be correct. If so that could lead to other problems because for a 
> given bucket our primary size would be different than the secondary. The 
> bucket sizes are used when you do a rebalance but basically we can have a 
> bunch of memory that is “untracked” so we might see the JVM heaps unbalanced 
> but geode will think the buckets are balanced. I’m not sure what we should do 
> about this.
> {quote}



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)


[jira] [Updated] (GEODE-8859) Redis data structures may not accurately reflect their size in Geode stats

2021-01-25 Thread Jens Deppe (Jira)


 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-8859?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Jens Deppe updated GEODE-8859:
--
Labels: release-blocker  (was: )

> Redis data structures may not accurately reflect their size in Geode stats
> --
>
> Key: GEODE-8859
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-8859
> Project: Geode
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Components: redis, statistics
>Reporter: Jens Deppe
>Priority: Major
>  Labels: release-blocker
>
> Here is a comment from Darrel regarding this issue. For some background, the 
> Redis structures implement {{Delta}}.
>  
> {quote}I was playing around with RedisInsight and was able to get most the 
> the overview dashboard and the data browser working with geode redis. But I 
> found a problem with how we are using geode that causes the geode stats that 
> track how much data is stored in a partitioned region to be wrong and the 
> bucket sizes used for rebalancing are also wrong. Basically when we do create 
> ops on the region the stats track it okay. But when we do updates then geode 
> always thinks that nothing (size wise) changed. So for example I created a 
> string by doing a redis “set” command. I saw the size of the string accounted 
> for in dataStoreBytesInUse. But then I kept doing redis “append” commands on 
> that key and the dataStoreBytesInUse did not change at all. I think the 
> problem is in how we are updating the data structure in place instead of 
> getting a copy, modifying it, and then putting the copy into the region. 
> Avoiding this copy gives us MUCH better performance but it messes up geode 
> when it is trying to calculate the memory increase or decrease. It is 
> possible that this is only an issue on the primary and that the secondary 
> sizing may be correct. If so that could lead to other problems because for a 
> given bucket our primary size would be different than the secondary. The 
> bucket sizes are used when you do a rebalance but basically we can have a 
> bunch of memory that is “untracked” so we might see the JVM heaps unbalanced 
> but geode will think the buckets are balanced. I’m not sure what we should do 
> about this.
> {quote}



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)


[jira] [Updated] (GEODE-8859) Redis data structures may not accurately reflect their size in Geode stats

2021-01-25 Thread Darrel Schneider (Jira)


 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-8859?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Darrel Schneider updated GEODE-8859:

Issue Type: Bug  (was: Improvement)

> Redis data structures may not accurately reflect their size in Geode stats
> --
>
> Key: GEODE-8859
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-8859
> Project: Geode
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Components: redis, statistics
>Reporter: Jens Deppe
>Priority: Major
>
> Here is a comment from Darrel regarding this issue. For some background, the 
> Redis structures implement {{Delta}}.
>  
> {quote}I was playing around with RedisInsight and was able to get most the 
> the overview dashboard and the data browser working with geode redis. But I 
> found a problem with how we are using geode that causes the geode stats that 
> track how much data is stored in a partitioned region to be wrong and the 
> bucket sizes used for rebalancing are also wrong. Basically when we do create 
> ops on the region the stats track it okay. But when we do updates then geode 
> always thinks that nothing (size wise) changed. So for example I created a 
> string by doing a redis “set” command. I saw the size of the string accounted 
> for in dataStoreBytesInUse. But then I kept doing redis “append” commands on 
> that key and the dataStoreBytesInUse did not change at all. I think the 
> problem is in how we are updating the data structure in place instead of 
> getting a copy, modifying it, and then putting the copy into the region. 
> Avoiding this copy gives us MUCH better performance but it messes up geode 
> when it is trying to calculate the memory increase or decrease. It is 
> possible that this is only an issue on the primary and that the secondary 
> sizing may be correct. If so that could lead to other problems because for a 
> given bucket our primary size would be different than the secondary. The 
> bucket sizes are used when you do a rebalance but basically we can have a 
> bunch of memory that is “untracked” so we might see the JVM heaps unbalanced 
> but geode will think the buckets are balanced. I’m not sure what we should do 
> about this.
> {quote}



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)


[jira] [Updated] (GEODE-8859) Redis data structures may not accurately reflect their size in Geode stats

2021-01-21 Thread Darrel Schneider (Jira)


 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-8859?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Darrel Schneider updated GEODE-8859:

Component/s: redis

> Redis data structures may not accurately reflect their size in Geode stats
> --
>
> Key: GEODE-8859
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-8859
> Project: Geode
>  Issue Type: Improvement
>  Components: redis, statistics
>Reporter: Jens Deppe
>Priority: Major
>
> Here is a comment from Darrel regarding this issue. For some background, the 
> Redis structures implement {{Delta}}.
>  
> {quote}I was playing around with RedisInsight and was able to get most the 
> the overview dashboard and the data browser working with geode redis. But I 
> found a problem with how we are using geode that causes the geode stats that 
> track how much data is stored in a partitioned region to be wrong and the 
> bucket sizes used for rebalancing are also wrong. Basically when we do create 
> ops on the region the stats track it okay. But when we do updates then geode 
> always thinks that nothing (size wise) changed. So for example I created a 
> string by doing a redis “set” command. I saw the size of the string accounted 
> for in dataStoreBytesInUse. But then I kept doing redis “append” commands on 
> that key and the dataStoreBytesInUse did not change at all. I think the 
> problem is in how we are updating the data structure in place instead of 
> getting a copy, modifying it, and then putting the copy into the region. 
> Avoiding this copy gives us MUCH better performance but it messes up geode 
> when it is trying to calculate the memory increase or decrease. It is 
> possible that this is only an issue on the primary and that the secondary 
> sizing may be correct. If so that could lead to other problems because for a 
> given bucket our primary size would be different than the secondary. The 
> bucket sizes are used when you do a rebalance but basically we can have a 
> bunch of memory that is “untracked” so we might see the JVM heaps unbalanced 
> but geode will think the buckets are balanced. I’m not sure what we should do 
> about this.
> {quote}



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)