Re: why no fdset patch in kernel?
Dancer (dancer@zeor.simegen.com)
Sat, 19 Jun 1999 10:32:06 +1000
"Stephen C. Tweedie" wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 16 Jun 1999 12:00:04 +0200, smurf@noris.de (Matthias Urlichs) said:
> > Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> writes:
> >> > Does anyone know why the fdset (large # file descriptors / processes)
> >> > patch has not been integrated into the kernel, even as experimental?
> >> In the 2.2 case mainly because it didn't get in in time,
>
> > Since work on 2.2 hasn't stopped (which is because we're not at 2.4 yet ;-)
> > will it eventually find its way to 2.2.whatever?
>
> Given that it is in the *ac* patches, there is a supported way of using
> it on 2.2 anyway. Is there much demand for the fdset patches as a
> separate, standalone patch for 2.2?
Every one of our internal and production servers requires a minimum of
3000 fds. (Well, okay, about three out of a hundred boxes don't actually
need that many). We've done some prelim tests on a server with
2.2.7-ac2, but I admit my boss was crestfallen to find out that the fd
mods didn't make the mainstream kernel.
D
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/