From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Dec 5 19:53:50 1996 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) id TAA26102 for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 5 Dec 1996 19:53:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from ican.net (ican.net [198.133.36.9]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with SMTP id TAA26096 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 1996 19:53:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from gate.ican.net(really [198.133.36.2]) by ican.net via sendmail with esmtp id for ; Thu, 5 Dec 1996 22:53:43 -0500 (EST) (Smail-3.2 1996-Jul-4 #1 built 1996-Jul-10) Received: (from smap@localhost) by gate.ican.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) id WAA27382 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 1996 22:50:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from nap.io.org(10.1.1.3) by gate.ican.net via smap (V1.3) id sma027372; Thu Dec 5 22:50:26 1996 Received: from localhost (taob@localhost) by nap.io.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA17349 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 1996 22:47:48 -0500 (EST) X-Authentication-Warning: nap.io.org: taob owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 22:47:48 -0500 (EST) From: Brian Tao To: FREEBSD-HACKERS-L Subject: More than 256 pty's per machine? Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk How difficult would this be? Based on what I see with our internal P133 staff server (easily over 100 concurrent logins, also running a Web server and IRC server, plus server X to a bunch of Suns), a PPro200 server should be able to support three or four hundred users, given enough RAM and swap. -- Brian Tao (BT300, taob@io.org, taob@ican.net) Senior Systems and Network Administrator, Internet Canada Corp. "Though this be madness, yet there is method in't"