From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Feb 17 19:25:38 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from patrocles.silby.com (d170.as13.nwbl0.wi.voyager.net [169.207.136.236]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34BDA37B402 for ; Sun, 17 Feb 2002 19:25:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (silby@localhost) by patrocles.silby.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g1HLSq704340; Sun, 17 Feb 2002 21:29:01 GMT (envelope-from silby@silby.com) X-Authentication-Warning: patrocles.silby.com: silby owned process doing -bs Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 21:28:52 +0000 (GMT) From: Mike Silbersack To: Peter Wemm Cc: Gaspar Chilingarov , Subject: Re: fork rate limit In-Reply-To: <20020218024714.E79393809@overcee.wemm.org> Message-ID: <20020217212630.Y4308-100000@patrocles.silby.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sun, 17 Feb 2002, Peter Wemm wrote: > No. Root's overrides come *after* automagic settings, regardless of how > well intentioned the settings are. > > If you are going to do this, it should be something along the lines of: > maxproc = NPROC; > if (maxproc > automaxproc) > maxproc = automaxproc; > TUNABLE_INT_FETCH("kern.maxproc", &maxproc); > Even this isn't quite right, because NPROC may be a compile option > which must be respected. The default #define NPROC may need adjusting. > > Cheers, > -Peter I already talked this over with Matt, and I'm going to leave this part of the patch out (for now, at least.) Once I sat down with a calculator I realized that as long as MAXUSERS <= MB of ram, this condition was already met. The rest (slightly tweaked) will probably go in soon, though. Mike "Silby" Silbersack To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message