JK
On Tue, 2 Apr 1996, Stephen Tweedie wrote:
> > On Mon, 1 Apr 1996 sct@dcs.ed.ac.uk wrote:
> >> It is not recommended to increase __FD_SET's size. Unfortunately,
> >> however large you make it, libc simply cannot cope with a select size
> >> larger than 256 fd's.
>
> > Libc doesn't have to do anything. I just need the fdset macros to
> > work and I need select to work.
>
> Yup. I wonder if it's worth upping the limit in libc (as exported by
> linux/fs.h) to 1024 anyway? It only really affects the size of the
> fd_set, so it doesn't cost much. It ought to be pretty easy to make
> the kernel's maximum fd number configurable, with processes inheriting
> the current default value on fork() (we probably don't want to change
> the fd table size dynamically on existing processes).