Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 11:40:47 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tani Hosokawa <unknown@riverstyx.net>
To: new-httpd@apache.org
Subject: Re: about threads (yes it's an obsession :-) (getting more processes
 under Linux)
In-Reply-To: <37791100.C9A9F652@eurosport.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.9906291139310.16559-100000@avarice.riverstyx.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: new-httpd-owner@apache.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org

This is kinda off-topic, I guess, but edit
/usr/src/linux/include/linux/tasks.h and set NR_TASKS to 2048, with 1800
as MAX_TASKS_PER_USER and you won't run into that wall again.  Those are
just the settings I prefer, and they work fine for me.

On Tue, 29 Jun 1999, Laurent Sinitambirivoutin wrote:

> hello guys :-)
> 
> before bothering you again i've read the docs about linuxthreads
> well, under linux threads are "viewed" as processes by the kernel, i
> mean they enter in the 512 entries of a regular linux kernel. I still
> see this as a weak point because my real problem at eurosport is that I
> just can't apache go forking (unless i want my server to kneel down of
> course) I thought that threads could solve the problem cuz I believed
> they wouldn't be accounted as one of the 512 process allowed... sniff !
> So, my question is: will things like apr (for now) and soon mpm will
> allow me to sleep well regarding the process limit ??
> 
> an other thing: i'm far from being a C-supercoder ;-), and I'm quite
> good in perl. If I can be of any help on the project (instead of posting
> silly questions ;), please just let me know

---
tani hosokawa
river styx internet