On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 10:50 AM, <casper....@sun.com> wrote:
>
>>Chris Pickett wrote:
>>> But I think ulimit -p should not be restricted to certain buffer
>>> sizes, it should be the script author to pick a safe value.
>>> If we use a global kernel tunable for setting the default PIPE_BUF it
>>> could spew a warning to /var/adm/messages if the size is not a
>>> multiple of 5120.
>>
>>I thought the issue was that POSIX allowed you to make this change
>>globally or per-filesystem, but not per-process:
>>http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/shell-discuss/2009-July/000868.html
>>
>>And you couldn't allow shrinking PIPE_BUF without breaking binary
>>compatibility with apps compiled with the existing value, but could
>>allow increasing it.
>
>
> One of the issues with "ulimit -p" is probably that both ends of the same
> pipe may have a different "ulimit -p" applied to them.
I don't think so, ulimit -p only applies to the time when the FIFO is created.
Chris
--
^---^
(@)v(@) Chris Pickett
| / IT consultant
===m==m=== pkch...@users.sourceforge.net
_______________________________________________
perf-discuss mailing list
perf-discuss@opensolaris.org
