March 19, 20179 yr I'm trying to create Windows 10 VM on Unraid 6 but when I select any other cpu then "cpu 0" or any other cpu with" cpu 0" I get "VM creation error Invalid value '1' for 'cpuset.cpus': Invalid argument" I tried creating other OS but I'm see same problem. I can run VM on one "cpu0" but it's extremely slow. I'm using xion
June 13, 20179 yr Having the same exact issue. Anyone have any idea? My system is a Proliant ML350 G6 with two E5530 cpus.
June 13, 20179 yr I might be missing something here as I don't use a Intel platform at the moment. But shouldn't the CPU cores be listed from 0 onwards and not skipping numbers out like 1,3,5 etc. Have you tried assigning only CPU 0 and 2 to a VM and see it it starts? I would expect the Unraid UI and the VM Manager UI to match in terms of CPU cores numbers.
June 13, 20179 yr 15 minutes ago, Tuftuf said: I might be missing something here as I don't use a Intel platform at the moment. But shouldn't the CPU cores be listed from 0 onwards and not skipping numbers out like 1,3,5 etc. Have you tried assigning only CPU 0 and 2 to a VM and see it it starts? I would expect the Unraid UI and the VM Manager UI to match in terms of CPU cores numbers. Selecting 0 and 2 works wonders. However, it's pretty weird that 1, 3 and so on are listed but unusable. Tried google without any luck.
June 13, 20179 yr I think this is bug or an issue from the underlying OS rather than Unraid itself. I've seen some other threads on cpu assignments or pairings been messed up, maybe this is related. But I believe your issue is that OS is presenting your 16 cores incorrectly to Unraid and causing a mismatch when you attempt to use the VM Manager UI. In other words, the numbers on the dashboard have to match the numbers on the VM Manager UI. You do not have a CPU core 1,3,5,7 etc etc available to assign. In the current state you could only assign 0,2 - 4,6 - 8,10 - 12,14 to a VM. Are you using the latest version? Depending on your use case you may want to test the 6.4RC now available, but understand this is a test version.
June 13, 20179 yr 1 minute ago, Tuftuf said: I think this is bug or an issue from the underlying OS rather than Unraid itself. I've seen some other threads on cpu assignments or pairings been messed up, maybe this is related. But I believe your issue is that OS is presenting your 16 cores incorrectly to Unraid and causing a mismatch when you attempt to use the VM Manager UI. In other words, the numbers on the dashboard have to match the numbers on the VM Manager UI. You do not have a CPU core 1,3,5,7 etc etc available to assign. In the current state you could only assign 0,2 - 4,6 - 8,10 - 12,14 to a VM. Are you using the latest version? Depending on your use case you may want to test the 6.4RC now available, but understand this is a test version. Yeah, my thoughts as well. I'm using the latest 6.3.5 release. This is the only problem I've got with the system so far. I would rather not update to a test version, but if that will fix it it's probably worth it.
June 14, 20179 yr downgrade to 6.2.4 to resolve core numbering issue. then when 6.4 is fully released, upgrade to fix it. 6.4rc will fix the core count, but it's not considered "safe" for data storage until it's done being tested.
June 14, 20179 yr 7 hours ago, 1812 said: downgrade to 6.2.4 to resolve core numbering issue. then when 6.4 is fully released, upgrade to fix it. 6.4rc will fix the core count, but it's not considered "safe" for data storage until it's done being tested. So that's a known issue with 6.3.5? I've got no real problem other than the corecount anyways, guess I'll just wait for 6.4. Thanks man!
June 14, 20179 yr 1 hour ago, TheToillMainn said: So that's a known issue with 6.3.5? I've got no real problem other than the corecount anyways, guess I'll just wait for 6.4. Thanks man! It's all of 6.3.x
June 14, 20179 yr 5 hours ago, 1812 said: It's all of 6.3.x I updated to 6.4RC and everything is fine now. Thanks dude! Edited June 14, 20179 yr by TheToillMainn
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.