On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Stuart Henderson <[email protected]>wrote:

> Haven't tried esxi 5 but I have some hack VMs under 4.1 which are
> working ok (i386 and amd64). Some things to try:-
>
> - Try different "guest os types" in the vm config page. On 4.1
> I typically set rhel 5 32-bit which seems to work fairly well,
> even for amd64, and uses the vic(4) network driver.
>

I used FreeBSD 64bit for the guest type.  I will try using different guest
types if switching to i386 doesn't improve it.


> - Try i386.
>
> - If you're overcommitting RAM, can you avoid doing that?
>

I have allocated less than 50% of the RAM, and almost none of it is being
used.


>
> - Might be worth giving -current a spin (or 5.0 when it's
> available - release isn't far off - note that people who pre-order
> CDs often receive them before the official release date ;-)
>

Does 5.0 have VM specific features in it?



>
>
> On 2011-10-19, Gene <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I'm trying to run OpenBSD 4.9 (amd64) under VMware vSphere 5 (ESXi 5).  I
> > set up four virtual machines with one core, 256 MB of RAM, and 4 GB of
> disk
> > space each.  I used the install49.iso as my installation medium.  Aside
> from
> > the OS installation, I haven't installed anything on them yet.
> >
> > They perform terribly.  The load average hovers around 1.5 on all of
> these
> > VMs although the CPU shows as being idle.  Connecting via SSH and
> switching
> > to root can take over a minute.  If I reboot the virtual machines they
> > perform well for a short time, but within 15-30 minutes they slow down to
> a
> > crawl again.
> >
> > These four machines are spread across two VM hosts, each with six cores
> and
> > 16 GB of RAM each.  I haven't started doing anything with these VMs yet.
>   I
> > have other VMs installed (Linux and FreeBSD) and they don't have this
> > problem.
> >
> > Has anyone else experienced this problem?  Is there tuning I can do to
> make
> > it work better?  I tried disabling mpbios, that did not have an effect.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > -Gene

Reply via email to