From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon May 27 09:32:03 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id JAA23598 for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 27 May 1996 09:32:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Glock.COM (root@glock.com [198.82.228.165]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id JAA23565 for ; Mon, 27 May 1996 09:31:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from mmead@localhost) by Glock.COM (8.7.3/8.7.3) id MAA05895; Mon, 27 May 1996 12:31:42 -0400 (EDT) From: "matthew c. mead" Message-Id: <199605271631.MAA05895@Glock.COM> Subject: Re: CHILD_MAX To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de Date: Mon, 27 May 1996 12:31:42 -0400 (EDT) Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <199605271603.SAA00854@uriah.heep.sax.de> from "J Wunsch" at May 27, 96 06:03:30 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24 ME8a] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk J Wunsch writes: > As matthew c. mead wrote: > > Does anyone know why CHILD_MAX for the kernel and CHILD_MAX > > in the /usr/include/sys/syslimits.h are different (128 and 40 > > respectively)? I'm running into the problem of having too few > > processes available. If I redefine the define in syslimits.h to > > 128 will I be able to run right away, or am I correct in > > presuming that I'm going to have to rebuild things? What all > > will I have to rebuild? > The correct way is > options "CHILD_MAX=128" > and rebuild the kernel. I thought I'd seen someone say that this didn't work. Are you sure that CHILD_MAX=128 in the kernel is not the default? Does syslimits.h really not need to be changed from 40? > I've once got the idea to make this limit dynamic, depending on the > size of the machine (amount of physical memory, speed of CPU), since > it's mostly there to prevent denial of resource attacks (like the > ``fork trap''). The current static limit doesn't fullfill this, it's > too high for a 386/16 w/ 4 MB RAM, and far too low for wcarchive. > Nobody (including me) ever got round to implement this however. Hmm. How difficult an undertaking is it? -matt -- Matthew C. Mead mmead@Glock.COM http://www.goof.com/~mmead/