EtreLibre
Contributor
Contributor

VMware Workstation 7.1.3 and Windows 7 SP1

Windows 7 SP1 is now out, and I installed it.

But, now, when VMware need to swap a little, I have an error message that tell there is a problem to alocate that memory.

Maybe do you know how fix it ?

Thank you Smiley Wink

0 Kudos
78 Replies
JJoel42
Hot Shot
Hot Shot

Thanks for bringing this to our attention.  We are looking in to this and will let you know what we find.

0 Kudos
rharry
VMware Employee
VMware Employee

Can you add this line to your host's WS config file  (C:\ProgramData\VMware\VMware Workstation\config.ini) and reboot the  host, and see if it fixes the issue for you..

vmmon.disableHostParameters = "TRUE"

and post here with the result, thanks.

Joe1948
Enthusiast
Enthusiast

Ed

Not brave really I made an image with Acronis TI before installing SP1. A restore only takes about 8-10 min. I have the drive partitioned with system in one and all data including VMs on the other My system seems to work OK  Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit 8 G ram.

Joe

0 Kudos
alexto
Contributor
Contributor

Thanks Harry,

I been using the switch vmmon.disableHostParameters = "TRUE" since morning and it's been fine (it's 12 noon now in Singapore). I have not yet encountered problems. :smileygrin: seems good.

I normally encounter the problem quite often (like after every 1, 2 restart of guest os).

Is it a work around or a fix ? Any side effect of using this switch ? Well, actually whatever it is, as long as my VM run smoothly, I'm fine with that.

Will feedback again if any problem

Alex

0 Kudos
jforce
Contributor
Contributor

I tested.

It WORKS!

Note: After edit .ini file, You must restart windows. Without restart, editing .ini is meaningless or not work properly. And If you want test (change TRUE or FALSE), DO restart windows, first.

0 Kudos
alexto
Contributor
Contributor

Right

I no longer have problem with my VMs now Smiley Happy. Been struggling for the last 10 days hoping for a new VMware release.

Thanks very much

0 Kudos
Vmax201110141
Contributor
Contributor

rharry wrote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Can you add this line to your  host's WS config file  (C:\ProgramData\VMware\VMware  Workstation\config.ini) and reboot the  host, and see if it fixes the  issue for you..

vmmon.disableHostParameters = "TRUE"

and post here with the result, thanks.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

What does this setting do?
Are there any disadvantages such as performance hits?
Greetings
Vmax
0 Kudos
EtreLibre
Contributor
Contributor

rharry a écrit:

Can you add this line to your host's WS config file  (C:\ProgramData\VMware\VMware Workstation\config.ini) and reboot the  host, and see if it fixes the issue for you..

vmmon.disableHostParameters = "TRUE"

and post here with the result, thanks.

Thank you, it works ! :smileylaugh:

0 Kudos
enoel
Contributor
Contributor

Hey I need some help..I have the vmware workstation loaded on a windows xp pro machine on our network with windows 7 as my VM..my physical machine uses a VPN connection to access a financial application..while this is connected i dont have access to my local files on my network..So i tried using the VM which is connected to my domain to access those files..but the problem is I dont know how to configure my VM to share the network connection and give me access while bypassing the VPN connectoin.. please help if you know the answer to this situation..thank you..

0 Kudos
martyfelker
Enthusiast
Enthusiast

I'm assuming  that Window 7 SP1 is the host.  If it is the guest  I would have other suggestions.  Have you tried uninstalling  WS reboot reinstall l WS reboot?

Marty

Marty Felker
0 Kudos
enoel
Contributor
Contributor

No Marty win xp is the host...win 7 is on the VM

0 Kudos
martyfelker
Enthusiast
Enthusiast

OK. Then it would you might want to install SP1 within the VM or alternatively download the .exe (I'm not sure there is one) or burn the ISO to DVD and attach the physical optical drive machine to the VM (VM tab drop down removable media). It still would not hurt to unisanll VM WS 7.1.3 from the XP host and then reinstall - your VM's will still be there! Again you might want to run Windows update in the virutal Win 7. Make as snapshot before had (Windows will make a restorae point but it's quite the same). Sorry for the plethora of scenarios but I've never heard of anything quite like this so I can only speculate. If however you've insalled a slipstreamed version of SP1 and still get the VM error I would Google the problem or even visit Microsoft forums. . Somebody on this thread has the same problem - you might consider working with them off-list. If you work for a company that licensed VMware than perhaps they have a service contract with VMware, Inc. and you can a support ticket directly from VMware, Inc. I don't so I have no idea what support they can or cannot give.

Good luck

Marty

Marty Felker
0 Kudos
EdP2
Enthusiast
Enthusiast

Thanks for the patch. It works but is not perfect.

On a pc which had no problems with SP1 before, it was neutral and seemed to have no effect (good!). However, on a memory limited host it made the guest playable, but I lost about 250MB of usable host memory that would otherwise have been allocated to the guest.

Just one note for VMWare - unless you have a current support subscription it appears to be impossible to post log files on this issue directly to support. Maybe VMWare should open special support posting facilities for issues such as this in the future.

0 Kudos
rharry
VMware Employee
VMware Employee

Thanks to all who responded.

The setting is a temporary workaround until we get a fix out.

The downside of the setting is that it leaves some memory on the table, as EdP points out.

0 Kudos
mattklein123
Contributor
Contributor

FWIW this workaround has also fixed my CentOS x64 guest. There don't appear to be any perf problems now. Please update this thread w/ the final fix.

0 Kudos
EtreLibre
Contributor
Contributor

I can't edit the first post... maybe VMware can ?

Thank you Smiley Wink

0 Kudos
JJoel42
Hot Shot
Hot Shot

Thanks to everyone who helped us to find this issue and test the temporary fix.  We plan to have a permanent solution available shortly that will address this issue and recover the host memory that this configuration change consumes.

0 Kudos
martyfelker
Enthusiast
Enthusiast

I am unclear about this problem - I believe there was a statement from VMware about a memory allocation problem on Windows 7 SP1 but I can't find it on this thread.  Anyway I created and installed Windows SBS 2011 (released last month to Technet).  Had to install  it from an ISO image since the ISO is actually 6.3GB and won't fit on a standard 4.7 GB DVD!  I created the VM  WS n 7.1.3 running on Debian 6.0 sid (wheezy). Kernel 2.7.37 with VMware patched per this forums workarounds.   No problems.  Opened the VM on Windows 7 SP1 (SP1 Standalone).  No problems.  Boot up is slow but that's understandable since this OS requires a mimum of 4 GB memory and my machine only has 8.  I agree with the previious poster. Dynamic memory allocation seems to only apply to Windwos 2008 R2 server - although the service pack for Windwos 7 and Windows 2008 R2 are on the same update.  It only applies to Hyper-V which can't be installed on Windows 7 (I could be wrong but if so I can't find any such reference).  Since VMware can't coexist with Hyper-V there is no way to test this  unless I go through the process   of converting a VDMK to VMM.  Serveral  programs seem to exits for this - some free.  I'll try this out (been meaning to for some time) when I get the chance using an HP Proliant server with Windows  2008 R2 SP1 already dual booted  with Ubuntu  10.10 server.That is  create  SBS  on Linux convert to VMM and run on it on   Hyper-V. <guess) this is actually off the topic of this thread> The problem only exists if you create the VMware VM using the Windows version of 7.1.3?

What is a benchmark program one could use to test performance (metrics)  of a VM anyway??

Marty

Marty Felker
0 Kudos
WoodyZ
Immortal
Immortal

Had to install  it from an ISO image since the ISO is actually 6.3GB and won't fit on a standard 4.7 GB DVD!

Wow!, I bet that was hard to figure out that you couldn't write 6.3GB to a DVD-5 Disc. Smiley Wink  That's what DVD-9 Discs are for! Smiley Happy

On a serious note though, installing from an ISO Image really is easier and much faster then from Optical Media and I'd only burn it to disc for two reasons, one being for backup purposes and two because I needed to install it on a physical machine.  Even installing across a LAN from ISO Image is faster then Optical Media.

0 Kudos
martyfelker
Enthusiast
Enthusiast

Actually I didn't try to burn 6.3 GB to 4.7 GB.  There is  complicated  workaround but surely  MS could do better.  Afer all Linux net install systems weigh in at 100 MB or so and are perfectly acceptable (maybe better because of the absolute latest software).  One does need a high speed broadband network and .  I live 50 miles from anywhere  in the USA,  so that will be a long time coming but its also true that I have a life outside cojputing !  I don't see the day MiS willl come upl with such a bright idea Smiley Wink

Itg's only speculation but I suspect that MS wants to have their partners sell a complete package with hardware and software preisntalled.

But yolu are totally correct.  I don't use DVD's anymore to install virtuall machinies.  The only exception is the rare times I want to replace an OS on my "real" computer and I test it first on a VM anyway.   The  advantage of VMware (or VirtualBox or Xen etgc) are just too hard to ignore.  When you can install a beast like SBS 2011 on a Vmware with Toots  and make the max size 128 GB and add a second HD at the same time and the whole VM directory is 19 GB - there is no way to beat that (unless you compress the VM!).  Beinig able to snapshot the system is even better.  Beas the heck out of imaginig the entire parttition or rely on  a Windows "restore" <doesn't restore  the files or course).

So while I have lambasted VMware I've also used it for maybe a decade or so.  The upgdrades of 3.0 are worth it although I hope they won't realease a version of WS which costs 99 bucks just to fix the kernel problem.   If they do I'll run 7.1.3 or free upade in the 7.1 series along with VirtualBox Hyper-V and other products.

Marty

Marty Felker
0 Kudos