Re: [patch 016/104] epoll: introduce resource usage limits

On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 07:46:18PM -0800, Davide Libenzi wrote:
On Wed, 28 Jan 2009, Bron Gondwana wrote:

On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 04:35:19PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
Can you resubmit all 4 patches, and cc: the epoll author, Davide? He's
the one that needs to accept these changes.

It's three now (two of them deserved to merged) and re-ordered so the
first two are trivial and the complex bits are easily skipped if you
don't want them.

Just looking for Davide's email address. Found it :) I'll follow up
this message with the patches. I'm not going to CC everyone else again
- but I'll CC LKML so you can follow it there if you want.

I already gave you my opinion on such code. There is no need for it. If
your servers are loaded, in the same way you bump NFILES (and likely
even other default configs), you bump up max_user_instances:

How can you tell if it's heavily loaded if you can't tell what the
current usage is? Just wait until you hit the limit?

$ echo NN > /proc/sys/fs/epoll/max_user_instances

It requires no extra crud in the kernel, and it works pretty darn good.

The current default of 128 is breaking pretty much every decent sized
postfix or apache server out there, where in the past there is no limit.
That's an awful lot of sysadmin time to track down why your server is
suddently hitting limits that didn't used to exist across every
installed Linux machine out there.

Of course the distributions can put an override in their sysctl.conf,
but in that case why not have a higher default?

Bron ( besides, the first two patches certainly aren't cruft, they're
just different default behaviours. The third is cruft, but I
believe it's useful cruft in the same way file-nr is cruft )
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Which Linux distro?
    ... >> Yes but you end up with loads of cruft not needed for a server X, ... >> Gnome, whatever. ...
    (uk.misc)
  • Re: Gutsy speed
    ... It's an Intel Celeron M 520, running at 1.6GHz, a SATA disk (no idea of ... always running a lot of cruft :-) Currently running an Apache server, ... Plone server, a PostGreSQL database, an NX server, two Konquerors with ...
    (Ubuntu)
  • Re: [PATCH 00/23] proc cleanup.
    ... It's hard coded inode numbers and the amount of cruft ... one of the worst faults how much low kernel memory it allows ... Glad to see the task_refs patches in particular resubmitted. ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: [patch] f83f9ac causes tasks running at MAX_PRIO
    ... some of this cruft and I had intended to send more patches after they ... More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html ... Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: upgraded to 8, no mouse is broken
    ... aids the user with - the defaults are intendedly and ... they don't assume something stupid, ... Or the user can't possibly maintain the server without a GUI interface...... ... I don't need a ton of cruft to run a single application that does some sort of task for me. ...
    (freebsd-questions)