Skip to content

Document sandbox root storage#643

Open
mstolarzblaxelai wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
mstolarz/eng-3024-sandbox-storage-mb
Open

Document sandbox root storage#643
mstolarzblaxelai wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
mstolarz/eng-3024-sandbox-storage-mb

Conversation

@mstolarzblaxelai

@mstolarzblaxelai mstolarzblaxelai commented Jun 25, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor
  • Documents sandbox root storage for CLI, Python SDK, and TypeScript SDK users.
  • Clarifies storageMb versus persistent volumes and root-volume conflicts.
  • Adds ENOSPC troubleshooting guidance.

Note

Documents the new storageMb/storage_mb sandbox creation parameter for disk-backed root storage across Overview, best-practices, deployment-reference, and troubleshooting pages. Adds ENOSPC guidance and clarifies root-storage vs volume trade-offs.

Written by Mendral for commit efbe16a.

@mintlify

mintlify Bot commented Jun 25, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Preview deployment for your docs. Learn more about Mintlify Previews.

Project Status Preview Updated (UTC)
blaxel 🟢 Ready View Preview Jun 25, 2026, 11:39 PM

mendral-app[bot]

This comment was marked as outdated.

@mendral-app

mendral-app Bot commented Jun 25, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🧪 Testing Guide

What this PR addresses

Documents the new storageMb (TypeScript/CLI) / storage_mb (Python) sandbox creation parameter that provisions disk-backed root storage without increasing memory. Updates the Overview, best-practices, deployment-reference, and troubleshooting pages with usage examples, trade-off explanations, and ENOSPC resolution guidance.

Steps to verify the documentation changes

  1. Overview page (Sandboxes/Overview.mdx): Confirm the storageMb / storage_mb parameter appears in all four code snippets (TypeScript createIfNotExists, Python createIfNotExists, TypeScript create, Python create) with the comment "optional; disk-backed root storage in MB".
  2. Overview – Memory and Filesystem section: Verify the new paragraphs clearly explain:
    • When to use storageMb vs volumes
    • That storageMb cannot be combined with a volume mounted at /
    • That the storage is ephemeral (deleted with the sandbox)
  3. Best practices (Sandboxes/best-practices.mdx): Check the sandbox filesystem bullet mentions storageMb / storage_mb for extra capacity, and the comparison table row for "Size" now reads "~50% of sandbox memory by default; configurable with root storage".
  4. Deployment reference (deployment-reference.mdx): Confirm the TOML config example includes # storageMb = 102400 with a descriptive comment.
  5. Troubleshooting (troubleshooting.mdx): Verify the ENOSPC section now lists storageMb as the first resolution option, includes the note about root storage + / volume incompatibility, and that existing options (increase memory, add volumes) are still present with updated wording.

What to verify (expected behavior)

  • All pages render correctly with no broken markdown or MDX syntax (check locally with the docs framework or via the deploy preview).
  • Parameter naming is consistent: storageMb for TypeScript/CLI, storage_mb for Python — no mix-ups.
  • The value 102400 (≈100 GB) is used consistently across all code examples.
  • No dead links — especially the /Sandboxes/Volumes and /Sandboxes/Filesystem references.
  • The guidance clearly distinguishes root storage (ephemeral, replaces root FS capacity) from volumes (persistent, subpath mounts) so users can make an informed choice.

Note

Posted by PR Testing Guide · Tag @mendral-app with feedback.

@mendral-app mendral-app Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

The only delta since the previous LGTM review is one sentence addition noting the ephemeral-volume quota cap. Documentation is consistent and accurate across all four files. No issues.

Tag @mendral-app with feedback or questions. View session

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant