🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Sep2.131055.25827@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu> audley@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Christopher D Audley) writes:
>In article <1992Sep1.211133.21384@news.lrz-muenchen.de> jolly@next2.cis.uni-muenchen.de () writes:
>>I think it is very useful to know, that the NeXT-Mach Kernel
>>does not support more than 2oo threads !
>[..munched..]
>>I don t know if 3.o solves that kernel-bug. ( using 2.1 )
>
>This is not a bug.  All operating system kernels have resource limits. Congrats,
>You've discovered one of mach's.  There's more than one way to kill a kernel by
>exceeding its limits, many I'm sure will remember that oldie but goodie
>"while(1) fork() ;".  You have to program around these limits, you can't just
>claim its a bug and push it onto someone elses plate.	I don't remember
>which header file contains a macro indicating the max number of threads per
>task, but I do know it exists ( anyone care to jump in with that info? ).

    The fact that it crashes the kernel *is* a bug, however.

    I've noticed that the NeXT, 3.0 included, appears to ignore
    many of the resource limits (limit command from CSH).. it
    looks at the coredumpsize and stacksize but completely ignores
    datasize and memoryuse.

    This is exceedingly dangerous NeXT!  It means that *one* process with a
    memory leak can crash the machine.	I'd rather just the one process go
    away instead, thank you!

				-Matt

>-=Chris
>
>--
>Christopher D. Audley		       Internet: audley@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu
>Elec & Comp Engineering		      -= NeXTmail Welcome =-
>The Johns Hopkins University	       Phone: (410)889-3639

--

    Matthew Dillon	    dillon@Overload.Berkeley.CA.US
    891 Regal Rd.	    uunet.uu.net!overload!dillon
    Berkeley, Ca. 94708     ham: KC6LVW (no mail drop)
    USA 		    Sandel-Avery Engineering (702)831-8000