From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 13 17:13:32 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 19861B9B for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 17:13:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from shell0.rawbw.com (shell0.rawbw.com [198.144.192.45]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 055E61A50 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 17:13:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from eagle.yuri.org (stunnel@localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by shell0.rawbw.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id rBDHDVZm053329 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 09:13:31 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from yuri@rawbw.com) Message-ID: <52AB403B.5070502@rawbw.com> Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 09:13:31 -0800 From: Yuri User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [VBox] Why VirtualBox process is so large? References: <52AADB18.3010407@rawbw.com> In-Reply-To: <52AADB18.3010407@rawbw.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 17:13:32 -0000 On 12/13/2013 02:02, Yuri wrote: > I have the VM that is allocated 512MB of base memory for the guest, > but its total memory size on host is 1263MB. This seems excessive. > What is the normal memory overhead for the VM? Is there a way to > reduce it? > Documentation doesn't elaborate on this. 512MB machine looks in ps(1) like this (linux guest): 5717 yuri 21 20 0 1263M 444M select 0 9:06 88.48% VirtualBox And 1024MB machine looks like this (FreeBSD guest): 13565 yuri 18 20 0 1720M 1135M uwait 5 71:13 4.05% VirtualBox Process sizes shouldn't be that high in both cases. My guess is that VBox takes freedom to allocate an additional disk cache maybe? Then this should be configurable. What other memory could this be? Leak? As a comparison, VMWare lists the sample overhead memories: http://pubs.vmware.com/vsphere-50/index.jsp?topic=%2Fcom.vmware.vsphere.resmgmt.doc_50%2FGUID-B42C72C1-F8D5-40DC-93D1-FB31849B1114.html For 1GB machine with 1CPU it would be ~26MB. We need to understand why VBox goes so much higher. Yuri