Jean-Paul Calderone wrote: > On Wed, 10 Jan 2007 12:11:59 -0200, Felipe Almeida Lessa > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>On 1/10/07, Laurent Pointal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>This is a system configurable limit (up to a maximum). >>> >>>See ulimit man pages. >>> >>>test >>> >>> ulimit -a >>> >>>to see what are the current limits, and try with >>> >>> ulimit -u 2000 >>> >>>to modify the maximum number of user process (AFAIK each thread use a >>>process entry on Linux) >> >>I don't think it's only this. > > Indeed you are correct. The actual limit you are hitting is the size > of your address space. Each thread is allocated 8MB of stack. 382 > threads consumes about 3GB of address space. Even though most of this > memory isn't actually allocated, the address space is still used up. So, > when you try to create the 383rd thread, the kernel can't find anyplace > to put its stack. So you can't create it. > > Try reducing your stack size or reducing the number of threads you create. > There's really actually almost no good reason to have this many threads, > even though it's possible. > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ python Desktop/test.py > 50 > 100 > 150 > 200 > 250 > 300 > 350 > Exception raised: can't start new thread > > Biggest number of threads: 382 > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ ulimit -Ss 4096 > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ python Desktop/test.py > 50 > 100 > 150 > 200 > 250 > 300 > 350 > 400 > 450 > 500 > 550 > 600 > 650 > 700 > 750 > Exception raised: can't start new thread > > Biggest number of threads: 764 > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ > > Jean-Paul
Would increasing the swap size do it also then ? hg -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
