Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 28 Jul 1999 23:16:44 +0200 | From | Frank van Maarseveen <> | Subject | Re: RFC: Dynamic group limit |
| |
On Wed, Jul 28, 1999 at 12:05:11PM +0200, Mattias.Gronlund wrote: > > That would eliminate the need for a sysctl. > > Not really, the sysctl is a configurable maximum that the a sysadmin > could set for some reason. As POSIX has support for a "dynamic" limit > and it isn't a problem to implement I see no reason not to. Well, only root (or anyone having a special capability) can call setgroups() and there are much easier ways for programs to eat all memory than calling setgroups(). I've seen it before happening with all sorts of limits: one day someone exceeds that limit and the next thing which will happen is that the sysadmin has to increase that limit. I don't see any real benefit from such a limit but on the other hand no real objection either when it uses the sysctl interface.
> I have checked your NFS-patch and thought a lot about it, but I see that > as one of the next step problems in this. Thanks! Finally someone who noticed this patch.
> The problem with changing NGROUPS_MAX is that this is a constant that > gets > compiled into binarys. If I buy a program with no source I might get > trouble. Yep! Even with source it is a nuisance having to compile it again because someone used statically compiled limits.
> I do not know enought about searching algorithms to just stef forward > and say > which to use, I might just try to implement it with a hash... Me too. But there exist something called AVL (binary tree, balanced) which is much more scalable. I believe it is already in the kernel.
[OFF-TOPIC]: Anyone having experience setting NGROUPS_MAX > 32 on OSF/1 Alpha 4.0? please mail me.
-- Frank van Maarseveen Driebergen f.vanmaarseveen@inter.nl.net The Netherlands -------------------------------------------------------------
- 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/
| |