Hi all,
after reaching process count something around 30568, processes start
getting pid from start, which ever is the first free entry slot in process
table. that means we can't have simultaneously more than roughly 2^15
processes?
am i correct?
regards,
Anil
> after reaching process count something around 30568, processes start
> getting pid from start, which ever is the first free entry slot in process
> table. that means we can't have simultaneously more than roughly 2^15
> processes?
Yes
On Sat, Nov 04, 2000 at 07:27:58PM +0530, [email protected] wrote:
> after reaching process count something around 30568, processes start
> getting pid from start, which ever is the first free entry slot in process
> table. that means we can't have simultaneously more than roughly 2^15
> processes?
> am i correct?
Yes.
(If that displeases you I can give you the trivial patch.
However, you really need some awesome machine before it
becomes reasonable to run that many processes.)
Andries
Le Sat, Nov 04, 2000 at 09:01:58PM +0100, Andries Brouwer a ?crit:
> > after reaching process count something around 30568, processes start
> > getting pid from start, which ever is the first free entry slot in process
> > table. that means we can't have simultaneously more than roughly 2^15
> > processes?
> > am i correct?
>
> Yes.
> (If that displeases you I can give you the trivial patch.
> However, you really need some awesome machine before it
> becomes reasonable to run that many processes.)
In the fact, the first limit to be reached will be NR_TASKS defined in
linux/tasks.h:
#define NR_TASKS 512 /* On x86 Max 4092, or 4090 w/APM configured. */
So I wonder if we could really have more than 4092 process under x86 ?
Arnaud.
On Tue, Nov 07, 2000 at 08:59:11AM +0100, Arnaud S . Launay wrote:
> In the fact, the first limit to be reached will be NR_TASKS defined in
> linux/tasks.h:
> #define NR_TASKS 512 /* On x86 Max 4092, or 4090 w/APM configured. */
>
> So I wonder if we could really have more than 4092 process under x86 ?
That define doesn't exist in 2.4 (anymore)
> Arnaud.