Hi Zak,

I've raised the max VM limit to 8191 in r36988).  We can provide a test build 
if you are unable to build from SVN, just let us know.

Kind Regards,
 Knut


On May 4, 2011, at 12:41 AM, Zak Perschon wrote:

> I had to restart the machine running all of the VMs, so I decided to increase 
> the amount of files per process like you suggested, relaunched, and we are 
> now hitting the projected 1023 virtual machine cap! Here is the error that 
> VboxManage pushes out if anyone is interested (A vbox.log file was also 
> created for the VM):
> 
> VBoxManage: error: VM creation failed (GVMM) (VERR_GVM_TOO_MANY_VMS)
> VBoxManage: error: Unknown error creating VM (VERR_GVM_TOO_MANY_VMS)
> VBoxManage: error: Details: code NS_ERROR_FAILURE (0x80004005), component 
> Console, interface IConsole, callee
> 
> Now that we made it this far, I guess the next step would be attempting to 
> remove the 1023 machine limit that virtualbox is imposing on us? Thanks again 
> for the help, its been very uplifting to have something actually show 
> progress (bashing our heads against a slew of different virtualization 
> solutions has been exhausting).
> 
> -Zak
> 
> > Date: Tue, 3 May 2011 20:39:14 +0200
> > From: [email protected]
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: [vbox-dev] Linux Host VM Cap?
> > 
> > On 03.05.2011 17:39, Zak Perschon wrote:
> > > After letting my mass-deploy script complete, we seem to have hit a cap
> > > at 1010 running VMs (A heck of a lot better than 128!). There doesn't
> > > seem to be a log created for the 1010th VM that failed, but here is the
> > > error message that I get when attempting to start it:
> > >
> > > VBoxManage: error: The Virtual Machine 'TinyCore-1011' has terminated
> > > unexpectidly during startup with exit code 1
> > > VboxManage: error: Details: code NS_ERROR_FAILURE (0x80004005),
> > > component Machine, interface IMachine, callee
> > >
> > > Any ideas as to where to go from here?
> > 
> > Of course :) It looks like you're running into the maximum number of 
> > open files _per process_ now, which defaults to 1024 on most Linux 
> > distros. The critical component in this respect is the VBoxXPCOMIPCD 
> > process (automatically started). This one is the central message broker 
> > for API requests. Since it also has a couple of files open the limit of 
> > API clients is a bit lower than 1024.
> > 
> > Not sure if it's worth the effort to get 13 VMs more, but if you want to 
> > get to the current hardcoded maximum you have to stop all VMs again. 
> > Please double check with the "ps" command that VBoxXPCOMIPCD has 
> > terminated (should happen approx. 5 seconds after the last API client is 
> > gone).
> > 
> > Then set a higher limit either straight with ulimit -n 2048, or 
> > following the descriptions (the comments are interesting as well) in 
> > http://www.cyberciti.biz/faq/linux-increase-the-maximum-number-of-open-files/
> > 
> > > The current system resource usage is as follows:
> > >
> > > CPU Usage: 10~% average idling, 20~% when we are utilizing all of the
> > > 1010 machines.
> > 
> > This sounds very good. Must be a really stripped down distribution which 
> > doesn't do much user friendly (i.e. CPU wasting) background activities. 
> > Another reason for the low utilization might actually be lock 
> > contention, as all those VMs need to coordinate their activities to some 
> > degree, and that could cause delays. We'd have some ideas what to change 
> > if this really happens.
> > 
> > > Memory: 146.8GB of 2019.9GB (which seems low, we have 1010 machines
> > > using 150MB of ram and 8 MB of vram, but we are getting replies from all
> > > of the machines)
> > > Disk Space: 48.6GB of 1.3TB (The machine is supposed to have an attached
> > > SAS drive, but its still on order)
> > 
> > The memory usage is suspiciously low. There could be a reason though - 
> > VirtualBox allocates VM memory lazily. If a VM doesn't touch all its 
> > memory then it will be below the expected value.
> > 
> > > The original goal of 1800 was our "conservative" estimate, we are
> > > actually aiming to get around 4,000 if possible. So far, Virtualbox has
> > > been the only VM solution we've tried that has gotten us this close
> > > (most either have a cap at around 300~ VMs that can't increase, or they
> > > don't support our host machine's hardware and crash). If you'd like,
> > > once we are finished with this I can provide a bit more detail on the VM
> > > solutions we've tried and the limitations we've ran in to.
> > 
> > For over 1023 it needs some code tweaking... we'll help you with that of 
> > course. Don't know yet when our expert can spare a few minutes for 
> > looking into this.
> > 
> > Klaus
> > 
> > >
> > > -Zak
> > >
> > > > Date: Tue, 3 May 2011 17:00:55 +0200
> > > > From: [email protected]
> > > > To: [email protected]
> > > > CC: [email protected]
> > > > Subject: Re: [vbox-dev] Linux Host VM Cap?
> > > >
> > > > Hi Zak,
> > > >
> > > > On 03.05.2011 00:29, Zak Perschon wrote:
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > > Here is a quick update for you (thanks a ton for the help by the 
> > > > > way!):
> > > > >
> > > > > I've been able to breach the 128 cap we had before w/ the fix you
> > > > > suggested, but have ran into some "user error issues" that have caused
> > > > > me to have to re-deploy/restart my VMs. The highest I've gotten so far
> > > > > is 675 running VMs, but I'm sure I'll be able to hit the 1023 mark. It
> > > > > takes a uprising amount of time to deploy/start 1000 VMS....
> > > >
> > > > Keeping fingers crossed... with 675 VMs, 150MB RAM each (how much VRAM,
> > > > I guessed 16MB?), you're around 280GB of RAM used by all of them, using
> > > > the rough rule of thumb that RAM usage of a VM is approx.
> > > > 1.02*(RAM+VRAM)+250MB. Varies greatly with the VM config details of
> > > course.
> > > >
> > > > With your monster gear having 1.8TB of free RAM the theoretical maximum
> > > > would be around 4300 of the tiny VMs you outlined (ignoring the disk and
> > > > CPU capacity).
> > > >
> > > > I'm working on updating the manual. The information for Solaris is
> > > > already there (in chapter 9), and the Linux information should also go
> > > > there.
> > > >
> > > > Just out of curiosity - are other virtualizers significantly faster with
> > > > such insanely high VM counts? It's really a very exotic use case.
> > > >
> > > > BTW, we'd appreciate keeping such threads on the mailing list - they
> > > > show that VirtualBox is a serious virtualization solution, and also help
> > > > others if they run into such extreme situations.
> > > >
> > > > Klaus
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -Zak
> > > > >
> > > > > > Date: Mon, 2 May 2011 19:01:21 +0200
> > > > > > From: [email protected]
> > > > > > To: [email protected]
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [vbox-dev] Linux Host VM Cap?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 01.05.2011 17:56, Knut St. Osmundsen wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi Zak!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The VMM imposes a limit of 1023 VMs on 64-bit hosts and 127 VMs on
> > > > > > > 32-bit hosts. See:
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > http://www.virtualbox.org/browser/trunk/src/VBox/VMM/VMMR0/GVMMR0.cpp#L121
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That means your plan to have 1800 VMs will not work without
> > > bumping the
> > > > > > hardcoded limits, and in this area it needs much more thinking
> > > than just
> > > > > > changing a #define.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Anyway, let's get you to that limit first...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If you run "ipcs -ls" you'll get a "max number of arrays = 128" 
> > > > > > line,
> > > > > > which is what you're most likely bumping into.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You can read the kernel defaults with "sysctl kernel.sem" as
> > > well, and
> > > > > > the last number needs to be increased to a bit more than 1023,
> > > just to
> > > > > > be on the safe side if some other app also needs a few semaphores.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "sysctl -w kernel.sem=250 32000 32 1200" should eliminate this 
> > > > > > limit.
> > > > > > You can also put this in /etc/sysctl.conf, so that it is set
> > > straight on
> > > > > > system boot, as otherwise these settings are lost on a reboot.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So... how many VMs can you start now?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Klaus
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Seeing you have 2TB of memory and 128 cores, I would assume you're
> > > > > > > running 64-bit Ubuntu. So, it is probably some other limit that
> > > you're
> > > > > > > hitting. It could be SysV semaphores, it could be memory available
> > > > > below
> > > > > > > 4GB, ... Could you please provide some more details regarding what
> > > > > > > happens when you are unable to launch more VMs? For instance, does
> > > > > a new
> > > > > > > VBox.log file get created for the VM? If it does, please zip it
> > > up and
> > > > > > > send it to me (or Klaus) per private mail and we'll work it out.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think the 64bit host OS assumption is safe... I would seriously 
> > > > > > ask
> > > > > > people to have their brain inspected if they'd use a 32bit OS for
> > > this.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Apr 29, 2011, at 7:43 PM, Zak Perschon wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> Ah, sorry forgot to include the original support thread. The
> > > limit I
> > > > > > >> hit was 128 active VMs at once. Once I hit that number, I was
> > > unable
> > > > > > >> to launch any more unless I stopped one that was already
> > > running. My
> > > > > > >> original thread can be found here (though there is little
> > > information
> > > > > > >> contained in
> > > > > > >> it):http://forums.virtualbox.org/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=40955
> > > > > > >> <http://forums.virtualbox.org/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=40955>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> -Zak
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> > Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 16:25:44 +0200
> > > > > > >> > From:[email protected]
> > > <mailto:[email protected]>
> > > > > > >> > To:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> > > > > > >> > Subject: Re: [vbox-dev] Linux Host VM Cap?
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > On 25.04.2011 18:00, Zak Perschon wrote:
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > I've come across what is seemingly a hard cap for the
> > > amount of
> > > > > > >> > > concurrent VMs I can run on a Linux based machine (after
> > > posting
> > > > > > >> on the
> > > > > > >> > > support forums, I was directed here). Apparently this same
> > > cap was
> > > > > > >> > > encountered on a solaris host and a fix was deployed to
> > > > > increase the
> > > > > > >> > > amount of VMs that were allowed to run at the same time. Was
> > > > > this fix
> > > > > > >> > > supposed to be included in other OS releases? Any information
> > > > > on this
> > > > > > >> > > would be greatly appreciated.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > That's a rather vague statement, and if you could tell what
> > > > > number of
> > > > > > >> > concurrently running VMs you can achieve I might be able to
> > > > > infer what
> > > > > > >> > limit is causing trouble for you.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > It could be the SysV semaphore count, the number of open
> > > files per
> > > > > > >> > process, and so on. All these defaults depend on the kernel
> > > > > > >> > configuration and/or distribution, so it's hard to generalize.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > Solaris is easy compared to that, as it is very uniform
> > > compared to
> > > > > > >> Linux.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > Klaus
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > Here is the information on the hardware/VM profiles I am 
> > > > > > >> > > using
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > Host Machine:
> > > > > > >> > > 128 Processor Cores (64 dual core Xenon processors
> > > > > [email protected] GHz)
> > > > > > >> > > 2.0 TB Memory (1.8~ Usable)
> > > > > > >> > > 1.8 TB RAID 0 (6 x 300GB HDD running at 10k RPM)
> > > > > > >> > > 16TB SAS
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > VM Profile
> > > > > > >> > > Compiled TinyCore Linux 2.6
> > > > > > >> > > Required Memory: 150~MB
> > > > > > >> > > Required HDD Space: 50MB
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > -Zak
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > >> > vbox-dev mailing list
> > > > > > >> >[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> > > > > > >> >http://vbox.innotek.de/mailman/listinfo/vbox-dev
> > > > > > >> _______________________________________________
> > > > > > >> vbox-dev mailing list
> > > > > > >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> > > > > > >> http://vbox.innotek.de/mailman/listinfo/vbox-dev
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Kind regards / Mit freundlichen Gruessen / Vennlig hilsen,
> > > > > > > bird
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG Knut St. Osmundsen
> > > > > > > Werkstrasse 24 Senior Staff Engineer, VirtualBox
> > > > > > > 71384 Weinstadt, Germany mailto:[email protected]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 Muenchen
> > > > > > > Registergericht: Amtsgericht Muenchen, HRA 95603
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Komplementaerin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V.
> > > > > > > Rijnzathe 6, 3454PV De Meern, Niederlande
> > > > > > > Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697
> > > > > > > Geschaeftsfuehrer: J. Kunz, M. van de Molen, A. van der Ven
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > vbox-dev mailing list
> > > > > > > [email protected]
> > > > > > > http://vbox.innotek.de/mailman/listinfo/vbox-dev
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Oracle <http://www.oracle.com>
> > > > > > Dr. Klaus Espenlaub | Snr. Manager Software Development Desktop
> > > > > > Virtualization
> > > > > > Phone: +49 7151 60405 205 <tel:+49715160405205>
> > > > > > Oracle VM VirtualBox
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | Werkstr. 24 | 71384 Weinstadt
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG
> > > > > > Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 München
> > > > > > Registergericht: Amtsgericht München, HRA 95603
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Komplementärin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V.
> > > > > > Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande
> > > > > > Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697
> > > > > > Geschäftsführer: Jürgen Kunz, Marcel van de Molen, Alexander van
> > > der Ven
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Green Oracle <http://www.oracle.com/commitment> Oracle is
> > > committed to
> > > > > > developing practices and products that help protect the environment
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > vbox-dev mailing list
> > > > > > [email protected]
> > > > > > http://vbox.innotek.de/mailman/listinfo/vbox-dev
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Oracle <http://www.oracle.com>
> > > > Dr. Klaus Espenlaub | Snr. Manager Software Development Desktop
> > > > Virtualization
> > > > Phone: +49 7151 60405 205 <tel:+49715160405205>
> > > > Oracle VM VirtualBox
> > > >
> > > > ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | Werkstr. 24 | 71384 Weinstadt
> > > >
> > > > ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG
> > > > Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 München
> > > > Registergericht: Amtsgericht München, HRA 95603
> > > >
> > > > Komplementärin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V.
> > > > Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande
> > > > Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697
> > > > Geschäftsführer: Jürgen Kunz, Marcel van de Molen, Alexander van der Ven
> > > >
> > > > Green Oracle <http://www.oracle.com/commitment> Oracle is committed to
> > > > developing practices and products that help protect the environment
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > vbox-dev mailing list
> > > [email protected]
> > > http://vbox.innotek.de/mailman/listinfo/vbox-dev
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > Oracle <http://www.oracle.com>
> > Dr. Klaus Espenlaub | Snr. Manager Software Development Desktop
> > Virtualization
> > Phone: +49 7151 60405 205 <tel:+49715160405205>
> > Oracle VM VirtualBox
> > 
> > ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | Werkstr. 24 | 71384 Weinstadt
> > 
> > ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG
> > Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 München
> > Registergericht: Amtsgericht München, HRA 95603
> > 
> > Komplementärin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V.
> > Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande
> > Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697
> > Geschäftsführer: Jürgen Kunz, Marcel van de Molen, Alexander van der Ven
> > 
> > Green Oracle <http://www.oracle.com/commitment> Oracle is committed to
> > developing practices and products that help protect the environment
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > vbox-dev mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://vbox.innotek.de/mailman/listinfo/vbox-dev
> _______________________________________________
> vbox-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://vbox.innotek.de/mailman/listinfo/vbox-dev

_______________________________________________
vbox-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://vbox.innotek.de/mailman/listinfo/vbox-dev

Reply via email to