Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 10:09:28 +1100 From: Peter Jeremy <peter.jeremy@alcatel.com.au> To: Andrzej Bialecki <abial@webgiro.com> Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: number of processes forked since boot Message-ID: <20010116100928.H91029@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.20.0101152321530.13323-100000@mx.webgiro.com>; from abial@webgiro.com on Mon, Jan 15, 2001 at 11:24:22PM %2B0100 References: <20010116.025742.74757685.ume@FreeBSD.org> <Pine.BSF.4.20.0101152321530.13323-100000@mx.webgiro.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2001-Jan-15 23:24:22 +0100, Andrzej Bialecki <abial@webgiro.com> wrote: >On Tue, 16 Jan 2001, Hajimu UMEMOTO wrote: ... >> +static unsigned int nforks = 0; >> +SYSCTL_UINT(_kern, KERN_NFORKS, nforks, CTLFLAG_RD, &nforks, 0, ""); > >If any, I think this should be long, otherwise on machines like web >servers the counter will overflow in a short time. On an i386, "long" and "int" are both 32 bits, hence "long" has a lower maximum count than "unsigned int". "unsigned long" might be a better choice (to give a greater range on the Alpha). In any case, at 1000 forks/sec, a 32-bit counter will still take nearly 50 days to wrap. Lots of other counters will have wrapped by this time. Peter To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010116100928.H91029>