Re: [PATCH] pid_max hang again...

From: Rik van Riel (riel@conectiva.com.br)
Date: Thu Sep 12 2002 - 16:17:26 EST

Next message: Benjamin Herrenschmidt: "Re: 2.4.19 SCSI core bug?"
Previous message: Thunder from the hill: "RE: Killing/balancing processes when overcommited"
In reply to: Andries Brouwer: "Re: [PATCH] pid_max hang again..."
Next in thread: yodaiken@fsmlabs.com: "Re: [PATCH] pid_max hang again..."
Reply: yodaiken@fsmlabs.com: "Re: [PATCH] pid_max hang again..."
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, Andries Brouwer wrote:

> Once people stand up and say that they need Linux machines with 10^6
> processes, or with 10^4 processes and real time guarantees, then we
> must have a discussion about data structures, and a discussion about
> standards.

IIRC that happened last month.

Rik

-- Bravely reimplemented by the knights who say "NIH".

http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/

Spamtraps of the month: september@surriel.com trac@trac.org

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Benjamin Herrenschmidt: "Re: 2.4.19 SCSI core bug?"
Previous message: Thunder from the hill: "RE: Killing/balancing processes when overcommited"
In reply to: Andries Brouwer: "Re: [PATCH] pid_max hang again..."
Next in thread: yodaiken@fsmlabs.com: "Re: [PATCH] pid_max hang again..."
Reply: yodaiken@fsmlabs.com: "Re: [PATCH] pid_max hang again..."
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Sep 15 2002 - 22:00:30 EST