From owner-freebsd-stable Tue Sep 21 16:15:54 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from forty-two.egroups.net (adsl-63-193-215-235.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [63.193.215.235]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6121A15698 for ; Tue, 21 Sep 1999 16:15:46 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gsutter@forty-two.egroups.net) Received: (from gsutter@localhost) by forty-two.egroups.net (8.9.3/8.9.2) id QAA27793; Tue, 21 Sep 1999 16:15:40 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gsutter) Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 16:15:40 -0700 From: Gregory Sutter To: Kip Macy Cc: stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: kern.maxfiles and kern.maxfilesperproc Message-ID: <19990921161540.D49731@forty-two.egroups.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.4i In-Reply-To: ; from Kip Macy on Sun, Sep 19, 1999 at 03:16:40PM -0700 Organization: Zer0 Approved: graham.spanier Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sun, Sep 19, 1999 at 03:16:40PM -0700, Kip Macy wrote: > Is kern.maxfiles the total number of files that can be open on the system > at one time? If so it seems very silly that by default it is the same > number as kern.maxfilesperproc -- meaning that any process can use up the > total number of files available to the system. I asked -hackers the exact same question a month or so ago, and received the same answer -- "use login.conf". I didn't like the answer, because I think that no single process should ever have control of all possible open files, and login.conf is not a sensible place for changing a bad default behavior. There should always be some left over for other processes, so that vital activities like logging and root logins can occur. The subject was dropped and I modified my boxes so that kern.maxfiles > kern.maxfilesperproc. Greg -- Gregory S. Sutter Heisenberg might have been here. mailto:gsutter@pobox.com http://www.pobox.com/~gsutter/ PGP DSS public key 0x40AE3052 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message