SMP and VirtualBox 3

[DanGe]

New information:
VirtualBox 3.0.0 has been released for public download. See the main VirtualBox website for the download link (http://www.virtualbox.org)
I have made another testing report some posts down: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=10449&p=104099#p104099

Edit: 3.0.2 has been released and been out for a while at the time I made this edit

--------------------------
So close...yet so far...

VirtualBox 3.0.0 beta 1 supports SMP up to 32 virtual cores. So I tried it out with 4 virtual cores on my Phenom x4.

Unless I missed something that prevented Linux SMP client from starting the WU correctly, I guess I'll wait for the full release and stick with 2x notfreds since VBox 3 is still beta software...

By the way, it's a range-check error that ended in CoreStatus FF. I doubt it's an error inherent in the WU because this was the third one that failed.
Interestingly though, the uniprocessor client seems to work...or at least it worked longer than the SMP client because I soon killed the uni client.

Other than that, VBox 3 works pretty well with normal usage, even with 4 virtual cores exposed to it.

------------------------

Edit: VirtualBox 3.0.0 beta 2 has been released. I will try that once my notfred WUs finish.
Here is the updated URL to the posting: http://forums.virtualbox.org/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=19126
Since the thread itself isn't updated if a new version comes out, here is the link to the beta feedback subforum: http://forums.virtualbox.org/viewforum.php?f=15

I should have mentioned this in the original post. Since Linux SMP requires a 64-bit OS (correct me if it doesn't...the download page is kinda confusing to me), you must have a 64-bit host OS. This is a current limitation for this beta that they plan to have fixed by the final release.

[toTOW]

4 cores are working fine with VMWare Workstation :



The CPU usage in the VM is not 100% because of the ATI GPU client running under windows.

[metal03326]

I'll try it. I have trouble with VMware's NAT under Widows 7 and I can't download/upload WU. Hope for better luck here.

[weedacres]

4 cores are working fine with VMWare Workstation :



The CPU usage in the VM is not 100% because of the ATI GPU client running under windows.

How does that compare performance wise with running 2 VM's (VmWare Server Free) at 2 cores each?

[toTOW]

It scales quite well ... I was getting 2500-2600 PPD on two cores ... and now I get 5000-5200 on four ... it's almost the double on most WUs, and it requires half the memory.

[DanGe]

VirtualBox 3.0.0 beta 2 was just released today. I've edited my original post to include the new information.

[toTOW]

Yes you're correct, Linux SMP require a 64 bit OS.

I don't know how it is with Virtualbox, but with VMWare Workstation, you can run a 64 bits guest on a 32 bits host

[DanGe]

I don't know how it is with Virtualbox, but with VMWare Workstation, you can run a 64 bits guest on a 32 bits host

I hope the VBox community gets that bug fixed by the final release before I have to return to Vista 32...
In this economic crisis, I think I'll stick with being cheap. Last time I checked, Workstation is about USD $190 . Of course I could torr--uh...never mind.

[DanGe]

No luck on VBox 3.0.0 b2 either... It all ends with CoreStatus FF.

Edit: notfred didn't work well with VBox either (VBox supports vmdk files). Same error message: CoreStatus FF

[toTOW]

How to run a single VM (VMWare) on 4 cores and how to set up VM priorities ?

[rbpeake]

It scales quite well ... I was getting 2500-2600 PPD on two cores ... and now I get 5000-5200 on four ... it's almost the double on most WUs, and it requires half the memory.

I am using the free VMWare Remote Console 2.5.0 on Vista, and am running two instances on my Quad because I can only run two cores on each VM.

Are you saying if I am willing to pay $189.00, I can run all 4 cores in one VM, and run the work unit twice as fast?

I guess the advantage like you said is less memory usage, plus it would return workunits faster to Stanford which they seem to appreciate, plus there would be only one VM to fuss with....

So, you found it a good investment?

Thanks!

[DanGe]

Good news everyone. The full release of VBox 3 works with SMP.

I tested it using notfred, since VBox supports vmdk.

However, two major caveats:
-It doesn't seem to utilize the CPU as efficiently has two notfreds on VMware. Not sure about that because I haven't been able to connect to it using FahMon (and I'm too lazy to calculate PPD on my own).
-If you thought the 2D lag on NVIDIA GPUs was bad enough, wait til you see this. Decreasing VirtualBox priority to Low via Task Manager doesn't seem to help. Right now, I'm having a lot of trouble using Firefox to type this post.

Edit: notfred is acting weird. Probably best if you install Linux manually instead of using notfred's client in VBox.

[bruce]

-If you thought the 2D lag on NVIDIA GPUs was bad enough, wait til you see this. Decreasing VirtualBox priority to Low via Task Manager doesn't seem to help. Right now, I'm having a lot of trouble using Firefox to type this post.

Just a wild-guess here, but check that you have enough RAM. Adding a new virtualization system will put unknown demands on RAM and what used to be enough might no longer be enough. I may be way off-base here, but it's worth checking.

[DanGe]

I'm not sure if the VBox is using RAM in a hidden way, but according to Task Manager, I still had quite a lot of RAM left (I think I was only using about 55-60% of my physical memory/RAM while I was running notfred).

On a another note, notfred's worked fine and actually got to around 7%, except that NAT was causing it to get weird IP addresses (not in the 192.168.x.x range). Not sure if that's what NAT is supposed to do. Bridged networking didn't allow it to connect.

I seem to be getting a problem with the SMP client on the Ubuntu VM. For some reason, MPI suddenly decided to quit (no EUE). And then, I started getting EUE's... . I guess I'll try it again tomorrow.

Perhaps someone else might have better luck.

[MESeidel]

-If you thought the 2D lag on NVIDIA GPUs was bad enough, wait til you see this. Decreasing VirtualBox priority to Low via Task Manager doesn't seem to help. Right now, I'm having a lot of trouble using Firefox to type this post.

That's normal behavior.
The GPU Cliens states (idle, low) have nothing to do with the ones in the Task-Manager.
I don't think it is different with any virtual machine plattform.

The Thread sheduler is deciding what Thread is getting CPU time by multiple information "tables".
To simply prevent a User or a programmer to set an application highest priority and making important System tasks miss CPU time.
You could try to set a higher priority in the task manager to the GPU client.
But still does not mean that this setup is favored over the ones done by programmer or others.
Also you could set up the SMP clients to not use 100% of CPU cycles.

I'm not sure if the VBox is using RAM in a hidden way, but according to Task Manager, I still had quite a lot of RAM left (I think I was only using about 55-60% of my physical memory/RAM while I was running notfred).

I haven't tried version 3, yet.
But on the older Versions it always reserved the the amout of memory given to guest on the host system.
So if one gives 1 GiByte to the guest, the host automatically has this 1 GiByte less free.
Well a SMP only Linux does not need much memory ;o)