Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 20 Apr 1999 22:25:53 -0400 (EDT) | From | System Administrator <> | Subject | Re: forking |
| |
i ran that as a normal user with only the shell and ssh open and it only got to 26.
-Cygnus
On Tue, 20 Apr 1999, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Apr 1999, Greg Lindahl wrote: > > > > Ok then, we seem to be looking at a 2.2.x problem, what regarding, I > > > don't know. It's not in 2.0.x (I've pushed my box into the 512 range on > > > 2.0.36 and then received the "cannot fork"). Suggestions so far have > > > been memory fragmentation and insufficient procs. Anyone else have > > > ideas? > > > > Actually, I've always had a problem like this on 2.0.x. I have a > > 64-node cluster, and I frequently run scripts which fork 128 processes > > at a time. These scripts occasionally get 'cannot fork', with no > > resource starvation evident... I wrote some test programs but wasn't > > able to get a nice, repeatable behavior. > > > > I get 501 on my system. > > #include <stdio.h> > #include <unistd.h> > #include <signal.h> > #include <wait.h> > > void reap(int unused) > { > while(wait3(&unused, WNOHANG, NULL) != -1) > ; > } > > main() > { > int i = 0; > (void)signal(SIGCHLD, reap); > for(;;) > { > switch(fork()) > { > case 0: > pause(); > exit(); > case -1: > kill(-1, SIGINT); > exit(1); > default: > fprintf(stderr,"Forks = %d\n", i++); > } > } > return 0; > } > > Cheers, > Dick Johnson > ***** FILE SYSTEM WAS MODIFIED ***** > Penguin : Linux version 2.2.6 on an i686 machine (400.59 BogoMips). > Warning : It's hard to remain at the trailing edge of technology. > > > - > 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/ >
- 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/
| |