RFC: jdk.PhysicalMemory vs. jdk.ContainerConfiguration expected behaviour?

[Severin Gehwolf]

Hi,

I've noticed that jdk.PhysicalMemory event reports the container memory
instead of the actual total memory of the container host. If one
compares 'memoryLimit' property of jdk.ContainerConfiguration events to
the 'totalSize' of jdk.PhysicalMemory event you'd notice that they're
the same inside a container. See [1].

As JFR is a monitoring tool it would be useful to get the hosts value
even inside a container via jdk.PhysicalMemory and the container value
via jdk.ContainerConfiguration (or some other event). If that was the
case, one could better reason about the actual system the app is
running on.

Would this make sense? Thoughts?

Thanks,
Severin

[1] https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8296671