From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 26 14:50:43 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C39AF16A43E for ; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 14:50:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dan@dan.emsphone.com) Received: from dan.emsphone.com (dan.emsphone.com [199.67.51.101]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B560B43D5F for ; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 14:50:42 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dan@dan.emsphone.com) Received: (from dan@localhost) by dan.emsphone.com (8.13.1/8.13.4) id k3QEobpG027991; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 09:50:37 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from dan) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 09:50:37 -0500 From: Dan Nelson To: Andrew Pantyukhin Message-ID: <20060426145037.GA6516@dan.emsphone.com> References: <18e02bd30604260709m6a0c33dp972a4f1d0a0e17ea@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-OS: FreeBSD 5.5-PRERELEASE X-message-flag: Outlook Error User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Cc: Iantcho Vassilev , FreeBSD Questions Subject: Re: Huge (100k+) number of processes X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 14:50:43 -0000 In the last episode (Apr 26), Andrew Pantyukhin said: > On 4/26/06, Iantcho Vassilev wrote: > > On 4/26/06, Andrew Pantyukhin wrote: > > > I was wondering if it's possible to run over 100k processes > > > simultaneously on a FreeBSD box with sufficient amount > > > of RAM (and CPU power). > > > > Sure,why not? > > The problem is that kern.maxproc=200000 line in /boot/loader.conf > only raised the real value to 21576. Is that authoritative, or should > I just try and run 200k processes? I only have 512Mb of RAM, and I > wonder if it's enough to run 100k+ of, say, /bin/sleep? Make sure you have enough RAM to cover those 100k processes. There's code that limits maxproc to physpages/12 ("Limit maxproc so that kmap entries cannot be exhausted by processes"). You can try removing that code, but each process does require a couple of private pages. Assuming 5 pages, you'll need 2 GB of RAM just for that overhead, before you take into account any memory your application will allocate. Are you sure you need 100k separate processes running? -- Dan Nelson dnelson@allantgroup.com