Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 15:11:16 -0400 From: Barney Wolff <barney@databus.com> To: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> Cc: Putinas Piliponis <Putinas.Piliponis@hansa.lt> Subject: Re: Could ARG_MAX be increased? Message-ID: <20040923191116.GA69716@pit.databus.com> In-Reply-To: <p06110411bd78c249333c@[128.113.24.47]> References: <217202CB5FF8AE439E263CE3D48ECB50686C37@honda.int.hansa.lt> <p06110411bd78c249333c@[128.113.24.47]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Sep 23, 2004 at 02:28:02PM -0400, Garance A Drosihn wrote: > > No, that is the solution which will work for any number of files, > on any Unix-based system. No matter what we increase MAX_ARGS to, > it still be possible that some users will have a good reason to > need to process even more args. > > The `find' command takes a little time to get comfortable with, > but it is a very useful utility program for some situations. I > have hit the limits in Solaris, for instance, and one of the > earlier messages claimed that Sun uses a value of 1meg for MAX_ARGS. > > I have nothing against the idea of increasing the value of MAX_ARGS, > as long as people realize that increasing it will not solve the issue > for all situations. <briefly emerging from my crypt> I spent 20 years on systems with a max of 5120. <lid back on> -- Barney Wolff http://www.databus.com/bwresume.pdf I'm available by contract or FT, in the NYC metro area or via the 'Net.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040923191116.GA69716>