Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because
the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.
RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.
DescriptionMichal Privoznik
2014-02-26 12:31:46 UTC
+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #981729 +++
--- Additional comment from Alex Jia on 2014-02-25 11:18:06 CET ---
Daniel, I can successfully start 41 containers not 40 now, is it an expected result?
# tail -3 /etc/libvirt/libvirtd.conf
max_clients = 20
max_workers = 20
max_queued_clients = 20
# for i in {1..50}; do virt-sandbox-service create -C -u httpd.service -N dhcp myapache$i;done
# for i in {1..50}; do virsh -c lxc:/// start myapache$i & done
# virsh -c lxc:/// -q list |wc -l
41
# rpm -q libvirt-daemon libvirt-sandbox kernel
libvirt-daemon-1.1.1-23.el7.x86_64
libvirt-sandbox-0.5.0-9.el7.x86_64
kernel-3.10.0-86.el7.x86_64
Additional info:
error: Failed to start domain myapache36
error: internal error: Failed to allocate free veth pair after 10 attempts
error: Failed to start domain myapache29
error: internal error: Failed to allocate free veth pair after 10 attempts
NOTE: Maybe, 10 attempts are too few for some users then they possibly want to change this, so I think it will be better if we have a configuration item for it, otherwise, we should document 10 attempts in libvirtd.conf or relevant guide.
--- Additional comment from Michal Privoznik on 2014-02-25 16:51:28 CET ---
(In reply to Alex Jia from comment #10)
> Daniel, I can successfully start 41 containers not 40 now, is it an expected
> result?
>
> # tail -3 /etc/libvirt/libvirtd.conf
> max_clients = 20
> max_workers = 20
> max_queued_clients = 20
>
> # for i in {1..50}; do virt-sandbox-service create -C -u httpd.service -N
> dhcp myapache$i;done
>
> # for i in {1..50}; do virsh -c lxc:/// start myapache$i & done
>
> # virsh -c lxc:/// -q list |wc -l
> 41
Yes and no. Kernel does some caching on sockets and some partial opening even if the server is not currently responsive too. So you may end up with more than 40 guests running. Hence I think anything above or equal to 40 is okay.
>
> # rpm -q libvirt-daemon libvirt-sandbox kernel
> libvirt-daemon-1.1.1-23.el7.x86_64
> libvirt-sandbox-0.5.0-9.el7.x86_64
> kernel-3.10.0-86.el7.x86_64
>
> Additional info:
>
> error: Failed to start domain myapache36
> error: internal error: Failed to allocate free veth pair after 10 attempts
>
> error: Failed to start domain myapache29
> error: internal error: Failed to allocate free veth pair after 10 attempts
>
This is an internal (buggy) implementation. Let me see if I can fix this.
--- Additional comment from Michal Privoznik on 2014-02-25 17:08:22 CET ---
Patch proposed upstream:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2014-February/msg01548.html
--- Additional comment from Michal Privoznik on 2014-02-26 10:07:51 CET ---
Moving to POST:
http://post-office.corp.redhat.com/archives/rhvirt-patches/2014-February/msg00829.html