From owner-freebsd-current Sat Jul 24 10:19:22 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mrelay.jrc.it (mrelay.jrc.it [139.191.1.65]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A0AB1513D for ; Sat, 24 Jul 1999 10:19:19 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from nick.hibma@jrc.it) Received: from elect8 (elect8.jrc.it [139.191.71.152]) by mrelay.jrc.it (LMC5692) with SMTP id TAA10196; Sat, 24 Jul 1999 19:19:13 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Sat, 24 Jul 1999 19:19:10 +0200 (MET DST) From: Nick Hibma X-Sender: n_hibma@elect8 Reply-To: Nick Hibma To: Matthew Dillon Cc: FreeBSD current mailing list Subject: Re: PR 12634 In-Reply-To: <199907241714.KAA35602@apollo.backplane.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > :PR 12634 mentions the increase of MAXSYMLINKS (src/sys/sys/param.h) to > :64. > : > :Any opinions? > : > :Nick > :http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=12634 > > Wellll.... 32 really ought to be enough. Looking at your PR I think It's not my PR. I am just asking for opinions on his proposal. > you are decoupling your directories a little too much and should > perhaps reduce the number of symlinks you use. For example, > instead of having /public -> site/public -> domain/public -> this/public > -> jhs.no_domain why not simply have /public be a symlink to > /site/domain/this/public ? > > While increasing the number would not hurt except, as you say, when > dealing with loops, I would hate to change it based on this particular > setup because I think this setup could be optimized considerably to > get well under the current limit of 32. That was what I thought as well. You probably end up drowning the NFS server in stat()-s I guess. Other envvironments, single machine environments, it's bad design. Cheers, Nick -- ISIS/STA, T.P.270, Joint Research Centre, 21020 Ispra, Italy To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message