{"action":"opened","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/libvmi/libvmi/issues/302","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/libvmi/libvmi/issues/302/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/libvmi/libvmi/issues/302/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/libvmi/libvmi/issues/302/events","html_url":"https://github.com/libvmi/libvmi/issues/302","id":121369479,"number":302,"title":"Change references to vmi->size to correctly use max_physical_ram_size and max_allocated_ram as appropriate","user":{"login":"awsaba","id":3173135,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/3173135?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/awsaba","html_url":"https://github.com/awsaba","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/awsaba/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/awsaba/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/awsaba/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/awsaba/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/awsaba/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/awsaba/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/awsaba/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/awsaba/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/awsaba/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":0,"created_at":"2015-12-09T23:56:18Z","updated_at":"2015-12-09T23:56:18Z","closed_at":null,"body":"A few references to vmi->size were left in the experimental snaphshot build.\r\n\r\nWork needs to be done to really figure out how that code should be using max_physical_ram_size vs. max_allocated_ram.  My intuition is that if it didn't make a distinction before and just used `size`, it probably didn't work correctly."}}