Add process leaderboard to system watcher notifications by Gennadiyev · Pull Request #11 · Gennadiyev/AWA

Gennadiyev · 2026-02-06T04:21:28Z

Adds a process leaderboard to system watcher notifications to help admins quickly identify which processes are consuming the most resources.

Changes

Added methods to fetch top CPU and memory-consuming processes
Updated alert notifications to include process leaderboards
Shows top 5 processes with PID, name, and usage metrics

Fixes #10

Generated with Claude Code

- Add get_top_processes_by_cpu() to fetch top CPU-consuming processes - Add get_top_processes_by_memory() to fetch top RAM-consuming processes - Add format_process_leaderboard() to format process info as markdown - Update send_cpu_alert() to include top 5 CPU-consuming processes - Update send_ram_alert() to include top 5 memory-consuming processes This helps system admins quickly identify which processes are causing high resource usage when alerts are triggered. Fixes #10 Co-authored-by: Yikun Ji <Gennadiyev@users.noreply.github.com>

claude · 2026-02-06T04:24:21Z

Code review

No issues found. Checked for bugs and CLAUDE.md compliance.

Copilot

Pull request overview

This PR adds process leaderboard functionality to the system watcher's alert notifications, helping administrators quickly identify resource-consuming processes when CPU or RAM usage exceeds configured thresholds. The feature addresses issue #10 by providing real-time diagnostic information alongside alerts.

Changes:

Added get_top_processes_by_cpu() and get_top_processes_by_memory() methods to retrieve top 5 resource-consuming processes
Added format_process_leaderboard() to format process information as markdown
Integrated process leaderboards into CPU and RAM alert notifications

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

Copilot · 2026-02-06T04:25:47Z

+            if metric_type == 'cpu':
+                usage = proc.get('cpu_percent', 0)
+                leaderboard += f"{i}. `{name}` (PID: {pid}) - {usage:.1f}%\n"
+            elif metric_type == 'memory':
+                usage_pct = proc.get('memory_percent', 0)
+                usage_mb = proc.get('memory_mb', 0)
+                leaderboard += f"{i}. `{name}` (PID: {pid}) - {usage_pct:.1f}% ({usage_mb:.0f} MB)\n"


The format_process_leaderboard method does not handle cases where metric_type is neither 'cpu' nor 'memory'. When an invalid metric type is provided, the method will silently add empty entries to the leaderboard (just the numbering without any usage information). Consider adding an else clause that either raises a ValueError for invalid metric types or logs a warning and returns an error message.

Copilot · 2026-02-06T04:25:47Z

+        # Get top CPU-consuming processes
+        top_processes = self.get_top_processes_by_cpu(top_n=5)
+        process_leaderboard = self.format_process_leaderboard(top_processes, 'cpu')


Calling get_top_processes_by_cpu() and get_top_processes_by_memory() during an alert adds computational overhead at a time when the system is already under stress (CPU or RAM usage has exceeded thresholds). Iterating through all processes with psutil.process_iter() can be resource-intensive on systems with many processes. Consider whether this additional load during high-usage scenarios could exacerbate the problem. An alternative approach would be to collect process information periodically in the background and cache it, then use cached data when sending alerts.

Copilot · 2026-02-06T04:25:48Z

+        # Get top memory-consuming processes
+        top_processes = self.get_top_processes_by_memory(top_n=5)
+        process_leaderboard = self.format_process_leaderboard(top_processes, 'memory')
+


Calling get_top_processes_by_memory() during an alert adds computational overhead at a time when the system is already under stress (RAM usage has exceeded the threshold). Iterating through all processes with psutil.process_iter() can be resource-intensive on systems with many processes. Consider whether this additional load during high-usage scenarios could exacerbate the problem. An alternative approach would be to collect process information periodically in the background and cache it, then use cached data when sending alerts.

Suggested change

# Get top memory-consuming processes

top_processes = self.get_top_processes_by_memory(top_n=5)

process_leaderboard = self.format_process_leaderboard(top_processes, 'memory')

# Get top memory-consuming processes, with simple caching to reduce

# overhead when the system is already under RAM pressure.

cache_ttl_seconds = 10

now = time.time()

cached_leaderboard = getattr(self, "_last_ram_process_leaderboard", None)

cached_time = getattr(self, "_last_ram_process_leaderboard_time", 0.0)

if cached_leaderboard is None or (now - cached_time) > cache_ttl_seconds:

top_processes = self.get_top_processes_by_memory(top_n=5)

process_leaderboard = self.format_process_leaderboard(top_processes, 'memory')

# Update cache

self._last_ram_process_leaderboard = process_leaderboard

self._last_ram_process_leaderboard_time = now

else:

process_leaderboard = cached_leaderboard

Copilot · 2026-02-06T04:25:48Z

+            for proc in psutil.process_iter(['pid', 'name', 'memory_percent', 'memory_info']):
+                try:
+                    pinfo = proc.info
+                    if pinfo['memory_percent'] is not None:


If pinfo['memory_info'] is None, accessing .rss will raise an AttributeError, which is not caught by the inner exception handler that only catches psutil.NoSuchProcess and psutil.AccessDenied. This will cause the outer exception handler to catch it and return an empty list. Consider adding a null check for pinfo['memory_info'] before accessing its rss attribute, similar to how memory_percent is checked on line 113.

Suggested change

if pinfo['memory_percent'] is not None:

if pinfo['memory_percent'] is not None and pinfo['memory_info'] is not None:

Copilot · 2026-02-06T04:25:48Z

+            name = proc.get('name', 'Unknown')
+            pid = proc.get('pid', '?')
+
+            if metric_type == 'cpu':
+                usage = proc.get('cpu_percent', 0)
+                leaderboard += f"{i}. `{name}` (PID: {pid}) - {usage:.1f}%\n"


Process names obtained from psutil could potentially contain backticks or other markdown special characters that could break the markdown formatting. Consider escaping or sanitizing the process name before including it in backticks to prevent markdown rendering issues. For example, a process named "my`process" would result in malformed markdown.

Copilot · 2026-02-06T04:25:48Z

+                except (psutil.NoSuchProcess, psutil.AccessDenied):
+                    pass
+        except Exception as e:
+            logger.error(f"Error getting top memory processes: {e}")


Error logging should include exc_info=True parameter to capture stack traces for debugging. This is the consistent pattern used throughout the codebase for exception logging.

Copilot · 2026-02-06T04:25:49Z

+            for proc in psutil.process_iter(['pid', 'name', 'cpu_percent']):
+                try:
+                    pinfo = proc.info
+                    if pinfo['cpu_percent'] is not None:
+                        processes.append(pinfo)


The per-process CPU percentage retrieved via psutil.process_iter(['cpu_percent']) returns an instantaneous value that may be 0.0 for many processes, especially on the first call or for processes that haven't been actively running. This could result in misleading or empty leaderboards. Consider using cpu_percent(interval=0.1) on each process object to get more accurate CPU usage, or document that the values represent instantaneous CPU usage and may not reflect overall resource consumption.

Suggested change

for proc in psutil.process_iter(['pid', 'name', 'cpu_percent']):

try:

pinfo = proc.info

if pinfo['cpu_percent'] is not None:

processes.append(pinfo)

# Use a short interval to get a more accurate CPU usage sample per process.

for proc in psutil.process_iter(['pid', 'name']):

try:

cpu_percent = proc.cpu_percent(interval=0.1)

if cpu_percent is None:

continue

pinfo = proc.info

pinfo['cpu_percent'] = cpu_percent

processes.append(pinfo)

Copilot · 2026-02-06T04:25:49Z

+                    if pinfo['cpu_percent'] is not None:
+                        processes.append(pinfo)
+                except (psutil.NoSuchProcess, psutil.AccessDenied):
+                    pass


'except' clause does nothing but pass and there is no explanatory comment.

Suggested change

pass

# The process may have terminated or become inaccessible between

# iteration and inspection; skip it and continue with the next one.

continue

Copilot · 2026-02-06T04:25:49Z

+                        # Add memory in MB for better readability
+                        pinfo['memory_mb'] = pinfo['memory_info'].rss / (1024 * 1024)
+                        processes.append(pinfo)
+                except (psutil.NoSuchProcess, psutil.AccessDenied):


'except' clause does nothing but pass and there is no explanatory comment.

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings February 6, 2026 04:21

pull-request-size Bot added the size/L label Feb 6, 2026

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of Gennadiyev February 6, 2026 04:21 View session

Copilot AI reviewed Feb 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

Navigation Menu

Add process leaderboard to system watcher notifications - #11

Add process leaderboard to system watcher notifications#11
Gennadiyev wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
claude/issue-10-20260206-0417

Gennadiyev commented Feb 6, 2026

Uh oh!

claude Bot commented Feb 6, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 6, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 6, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 6, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 6, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 6, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 6, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 6, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 6, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 6, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

-        # Get top memory-consuming processes
-        top_processes = self.get_top_processes_by_memory(top_n=5)
-        process_leaderboard = self.format_process_leaderboard(top_processes, 'memory')
+        # Get top memory-consuming processes, with simple caching to reduce
+        # overhead when the system is already under RAM pressure.
+        cache_ttl_seconds = 10
+        now = time.time()
+        cached_leaderboard = getattr(self, "_last_ram_process_leaderboard", None)
+        cached_time = getattr(self, "_last_ram_process_leaderboard_time", 0.0)
+        if cached_leaderboard is None or (now - cached_time) > cache_ttl_seconds:
+            top_processes = self.get_top_processes_by_memory(top_n=5)
+            process_leaderboard = self.format_process_leaderboard(top_processes, 'memory')
+            # Update cache
+            self._last_ram_process_leaderboard = process_leaderboard
+            self._last_ram_process_leaderboard_time = now
+        else:
+            process_leaderboard = cached_leaderboard

	if pinfo['memory_percent'] is not None:
	if pinfo['memory_percent'] is not None and pinfo['memory_info'] is not None:

-                    pass
+                    # The process may have terminated or become inaccessible between
+                    # iteration and inspection; skip it and continue with the next one.
+                    continue

Conversation

Gennadiyev commented Feb 6, 2026

Changes

Uh oh!

claude Bot commented Feb 6, 2026

Code review

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 6, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 6, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 6, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 6, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 6, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 6, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 6, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 6, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 6, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants