Is there a significant issue to allocating all available cores to one VM if that is the only major task...











up vote
2
down vote

favorite












I have a one-off task that requires me to use a VM to fix a build bug a software project using SCons (Python). The testing cycle is fairly short, resulting in frequent rebuilds. I'm using a 4-core laptop to host the VM and doing little else (a handful of tabs in Firefox, one terminal window for vim) aside from the work in the VM itself. I'm considering increasing the hardware allotment to the VM from 2 to 4 cores, but this would give all of my cores to the VM. Is this a terrible idea?



More info in case it matters:

VirtualBox on Ubuntu 18.04 LTS

RAM: 2GB of 8GB used according to free, 4GB allocated to the VM.
Storage: 256GB SSD (M.2)










share|improve this question




























    up vote
    2
    down vote

    favorite












    I have a one-off task that requires me to use a VM to fix a build bug a software project using SCons (Python). The testing cycle is fairly short, resulting in frequent rebuilds. I'm using a 4-core laptop to host the VM and doing little else (a handful of tabs in Firefox, one terminal window for vim) aside from the work in the VM itself. I'm considering increasing the hardware allotment to the VM from 2 to 4 cores, but this would give all of my cores to the VM. Is this a terrible idea?



    More info in case it matters:

    VirtualBox on Ubuntu 18.04 LTS

    RAM: 2GB of 8GB used according to free, 4GB allocated to the VM.
    Storage: 256GB SSD (M.2)










    share|improve this question


























      up vote
      2
      down vote

      favorite









      up vote
      2
      down vote

      favorite











      I have a one-off task that requires me to use a VM to fix a build bug a software project using SCons (Python). The testing cycle is fairly short, resulting in frequent rebuilds. I'm using a 4-core laptop to host the VM and doing little else (a handful of tabs in Firefox, one terminal window for vim) aside from the work in the VM itself. I'm considering increasing the hardware allotment to the VM from 2 to 4 cores, but this would give all of my cores to the VM. Is this a terrible idea?



      More info in case it matters:

      VirtualBox on Ubuntu 18.04 LTS

      RAM: 2GB of 8GB used according to free, 4GB allocated to the VM.
      Storage: 256GB SSD (M.2)










      share|improve this question















      I have a one-off task that requires me to use a VM to fix a build bug a software project using SCons (Python). The testing cycle is fairly short, resulting in frequent rebuilds. I'm using a 4-core laptop to host the VM and doing little else (a handful of tabs in Firefox, one terminal window for vim) aside from the work in the VM itself. I'm considering increasing the hardware allotment to the VM from 2 to 4 cores, but this would give all of my cores to the VM. Is this a terrible idea?



      More info in case it matters:

      VirtualBox on Ubuntu 18.04 LTS

      RAM: 2GB of 8GB used according to free, 4GB allocated to the VM.
      Storage: 256GB SSD (M.2)







      memory virtual-machine cpu multi-core core






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited yesterday

























      asked yesterday









      user3.1415927

      111113




      111113






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          3
          down vote



          accepted










          This should not be a problem - worst case it will make your desktop sluggish. The biggest gotcha with resource allocation is oversubscribing RAM and causing the parent to swap, followed by disk IO bottlenecks in general (which can be somewhat mitigated by using an SSD)






          share|improve this answer





















          • I am using an SSD. Updated original question with that information. So if I keep memory allocation well within available RAM, processors are not as important? Would it be safer to allocate 3 instead of 4 processors?
            – user3.1415927
            yesterday










          • Processors are important, but you are unlikely to lick you system up by over subscribing the CPU. All of this us quite safe, and yes, allocating 3 CPUs may allow more responsiveness on the host, but it's not a big deal.
            – davidgo
            yesterday











          Your Answer








          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "3"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














           

          draft saved


          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsuperuser.com%2fquestions%2f1378123%2fis-there-a-significant-issue-to-allocating-all-available-cores-to-one-vm-if-that%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes








          up vote
          3
          down vote



          accepted










          This should not be a problem - worst case it will make your desktop sluggish. The biggest gotcha with resource allocation is oversubscribing RAM and causing the parent to swap, followed by disk IO bottlenecks in general (which can be somewhat mitigated by using an SSD)






          share|improve this answer





















          • I am using an SSD. Updated original question with that information. So if I keep memory allocation well within available RAM, processors are not as important? Would it be safer to allocate 3 instead of 4 processors?
            – user3.1415927
            yesterday










          • Processors are important, but you are unlikely to lick you system up by over subscribing the CPU. All of this us quite safe, and yes, allocating 3 CPUs may allow more responsiveness on the host, but it's not a big deal.
            – davidgo
            yesterday















          up vote
          3
          down vote



          accepted










          This should not be a problem - worst case it will make your desktop sluggish. The biggest gotcha with resource allocation is oversubscribing RAM and causing the parent to swap, followed by disk IO bottlenecks in general (which can be somewhat mitigated by using an SSD)






          share|improve this answer





















          • I am using an SSD. Updated original question with that information. So if I keep memory allocation well within available RAM, processors are not as important? Would it be safer to allocate 3 instead of 4 processors?
            – user3.1415927
            yesterday










          • Processors are important, but you are unlikely to lick you system up by over subscribing the CPU. All of this us quite safe, and yes, allocating 3 CPUs may allow more responsiveness on the host, but it's not a big deal.
            – davidgo
            yesterday













          up vote
          3
          down vote



          accepted







          up vote
          3
          down vote



          accepted






          This should not be a problem - worst case it will make your desktop sluggish. The biggest gotcha with resource allocation is oversubscribing RAM and causing the parent to swap, followed by disk IO bottlenecks in general (which can be somewhat mitigated by using an SSD)






          share|improve this answer












          This should not be a problem - worst case it will make your desktop sluggish. The biggest gotcha with resource allocation is oversubscribing RAM and causing the parent to swap, followed by disk IO bottlenecks in general (which can be somewhat mitigated by using an SSD)







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered yesterday









          davidgo

          41.4k74985




          41.4k74985












          • I am using an SSD. Updated original question with that information. So if I keep memory allocation well within available RAM, processors are not as important? Would it be safer to allocate 3 instead of 4 processors?
            – user3.1415927
            yesterday










          • Processors are important, but you are unlikely to lick you system up by over subscribing the CPU. All of this us quite safe, and yes, allocating 3 CPUs may allow more responsiveness on the host, but it's not a big deal.
            – davidgo
            yesterday


















          • I am using an SSD. Updated original question with that information. So if I keep memory allocation well within available RAM, processors are not as important? Would it be safer to allocate 3 instead of 4 processors?
            – user3.1415927
            yesterday










          • Processors are important, but you are unlikely to lick you system up by over subscribing the CPU. All of this us quite safe, and yes, allocating 3 CPUs may allow more responsiveness on the host, but it's not a big deal.
            – davidgo
            yesterday
















          I am using an SSD. Updated original question with that information. So if I keep memory allocation well within available RAM, processors are not as important? Would it be safer to allocate 3 instead of 4 processors?
          – user3.1415927
          yesterday




          I am using an SSD. Updated original question with that information. So if I keep memory allocation well within available RAM, processors are not as important? Would it be safer to allocate 3 instead of 4 processors?
          – user3.1415927
          yesterday












          Processors are important, but you are unlikely to lick you system up by over subscribing the CPU. All of this us quite safe, and yes, allocating 3 CPUs may allow more responsiveness on the host, but it's not a big deal.
          – davidgo
          yesterday




          Processors are important, but you are unlikely to lick you system up by over subscribing the CPU. All of this us quite safe, and yes, allocating 3 CPUs may allow more responsiveness on the host, but it's not a big deal.
          – davidgo
          yesterday


















           

          draft saved


          draft discarded



















































           


          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsuperuser.com%2fquestions%2f1378123%2fis-there-a-significant-issue-to-allocating-all-available-cores-to-one-vm-if-that%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          Accessing regular linux commands in Huawei's Dopra Linux

          Can't connect RFCOMM socket: Host is down

          Kernel panic - not syncing: Fatal Exception in Interrupt