feat(learn): add article on tuning memory

[avivkeller]

Description

This PR adds an article on understanding and tuning Memory in Node.js. It discusses the V8 memory types (Stack and Heap), along with Old vs New space.

CC @nodejs/diagnostics

Validation

After building the package, the article should exist at /learn/diagnostics/memory/understanding-and-tuning-memory

Related Issues

Fixes #7637

Check List

• I have read the Contributing Guidelines and made commit messages that follow the guideline.
• I have run npm run format to ensure the code follows the style guide.
• I have run npm run test to check if all tests are passing.
• I have run npx turbo build to check if the website builds without errors.
• I've covered new added functionality with unit tests if necessary.

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name	Status	Preview	Updated (UTC)
nodejs-org	✅ Ready (Inspect)	Visit Preview	Apr 11, 2025 5:59pm

[Copilot]

Copilot reviewed 3 out of 4 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

Files not reviewed (1)

• packages/i18n/locales/en.json: Language not supported

[avivkeller]

See https://nodejs-6rnadthwo-openjs.vercel.app/en/learn/diagnostics/memory/understanding-and-tuning-memory

[jsumners-nr]

Thank you for taking this on and so quickly. I have some feedback, but overall it's looking good.

I'd also like to see @mcollina's feedback on it.

[jsumners-nr]

I'm finding it difficult to re-review the things I had noted originally because they have been marked as resolved and no longer show up inline in the change set. But I am getting a distinct impression that a predictive text generator was used to address the concerns I raised. I would like to see very clear scenarios in which each setting would be useful, and a discussion about what one can expect when making a change with the setting.

[avivkeller]

I've addressed the conversations in commit 24bcca2. If the examples I included don’t meet your expectations, I’m open to hearing suggestions for improvement.

That said, I find it a bit insulting to have my writing likened to a “predictive text generator.”

[jsumners-nr]

I've addressed the conversations in commit 24bcca2.

The commit diff helps, thank you.

If the examples I included don’t meet your expectations, I’m open to hearing suggestions for improvement.

The thing is, I'm not seeing many actual examples. Lines 115 and 119 in the linked change set are highlighting some specific cases, but the others are mainly wordier rephrasings of the original blocks. Like in line 103 of that change set: what constitutes "high throughput" and what is the thing that is "noticeable"? I think the document should assume the reader has a basic grasp on memory concepts, but is by no means an expert and is trying to expand their knowledge through this doc. I think such a reader would be looking for concrete examples along the lines of "in an application that does A, with B requests per second, and generates objects that look like { something } if we change setting X from Y to Z, then we should see [listed changes] in the application and its performance."

That said, I find it a bit insulting to have my writing likened to a “predictive text generator.”

All I can go on is the evidence before me. What I see is as I described: moderate rephrasings of the reviewed blocks of text. That's what I would expect from such a tool.

[avivkeller]

Thanks for the additional feedback, e1e3316 should address your review, along with one minor issues that occur when using non-VSCode editors (Seriously, why do half of my editors use fancy punctuation?).

All I can go on is the evidence before me. What I see is as I described: moderate rephrasings of the reviewed blocks of text. That's what I would expect from such a tool.

I'm always rewording things, so that's unrelated to your reviews. I'm sorry if they didn't address your concerns

[mcollina]

lgtm

[github-actions]

Unit Test Coverage Report

Title	Lines	Statements	Branches	Functions
@node-core/ui-components		95.83% (161/168)	77.86% (102/131)	88.57% (31/35)
@nodejs/website		84.7% (493/582)	76.03% (165/217)	86.88% (106/122)

Title	Tests	Skipped	Failures	Errors	Time
@node-core/ui-components	24	0 💤	0 ❌	0 🔥	4.742s ⏱️
@nodejs/website	156	0 💤	0 ❌	0 🔥	6.476s ⏱️

[github-actions]

Lighthouse Results

URL	Performance	Accessibility	Best Practices	SEO	Report
/en	🟠 88	🟢 100	🟢 100	🟢 91	🔗
/en/about	🟢 100	🟢 100	🟢 100	🟢 91	🔗
/en/about/previous-releases	🟢 99	🟢 100	🟢 100	🟢 92	🔗
/en/download	🟢 99	🟢 100	🟢 100	🟢 91	🔗
/en/blog	🟢 100	🟢 100	🟢 96	🟢 92	🔗