From owner-freebsd-stable  Sun Apr 22 23:23:16 2001
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from amant.pdl.cs.cmu.edu (AMANT.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.189.84])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B34037B423
	for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 23:23:08 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from dpetrou@amant.pdl.cs.cmu.edu)
Received: (from dpetrou@localhost)
	by amant.pdl.cs.cmu.edu (8.11.1/8.11.1) id f3N6LZK49359
	for freebsd-stable@freebsd.org; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 02:21:35 -0400 (EDT)
	(envelope-from dpetrou)
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 02:21:35 -0400
From: David Petrou <dpetrou@cs.cmu.edu>
To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject: shared mem default limits
Message-ID: <20010423022135.A48878@amant.pdl.cs.cmu.edu>
Reply-To: dpetrou@cs.cmu.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
X-Hit-Pick: Aphex Twin / Selected Ambient Works Volume II (disc 1)
Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

Hi.  I used to get a lot of errors concerning shared memory segments
not being available.  After doing some googling, I found the magic
answer to my gnome woes.  It turns out that running Enlightenment,
gnome, and lots of windows quickly exhausts the default kernel limits
on some shared mem parameters.

This problem was discussed in -current in June 2000.

After throwing in:

options  SHMMAXPGS=8192
options  SHMMNI=4096
options  SHMSEG=1024

my problems went away.  (Problems would manifest themselves as windows
disappearing when starting new apps, etc.)

Perhaps we could up the defaults?  Is there a compelling reason on
today's machines to keep them small?

david

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message