Re: upgrade to fedora 9 bash fork: Resource temporarily unavailable

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 19May2008 19:47, mark <markkicks@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
| > | > Hmm, another thought. See what ulimit says about your process limit;
| > | > maybe F9 have some default limits that F8 did not.
| > | I increased open files in F8 to 32768, that is preserved here in F9
| > |
| > | How do I check my process limit? this is ulimit -a output
| > [...]
| > | max user processes              (-u) 1024
| >
| > Well, that seems to be more than 425. Anyone else got any ideas?
| How do I increase this in /etc/security/limits.conf?
| I changed max files like this
| mark soft nofile 32768
| mark hard nofile 32768

I'm not sure, and I don't have a fedora system to hand at present.

| > Just for completeness, to eliminate the rror message being a lie,
| > can you reproduce the fork failure using strace, eg:
| >  strace -f -e trace=process 2>strace.out some-script-that-will-fail.sh
| >
| > and verify from the "strace.out" file that in fact it is fork() that
| > fails.
| i am not able to consistently reproduce this problem. sometimes this
| error comes, and sometimes it doesnt..

But is it often enough that you could run a script by hand a few times
and expect to get it?

| and there is no error messages
| /var/log/messages too!!!

It's not the kind of thing you expect in there, though if something
were wrong with the system from its own point of view you might.

| how could the error message be a lie? what scenario could this be!!!

Basicly, if the app lies to you. It is unlikely. I'm imagining an app
calling a library routine the involves a fork() and maybe some other
stuff, then if the library routine fails then the app says "no more
processes", even though there might be a few different causes for the
library routine to fail. A bit like IE often suggests that maybe you're not
connected to the interweb if the slighted thing goes wrong.

It's unlikely, as I say. But an strace as described above, when things
fail, should unambiguously show a fork() call with a distinctive error
code. It avoids relying on the app's own error message for verification.

Cheers,
-- 
Cameron Simpson <cs@xxxxxxxxxx> DoD#743
http://www.cskk.ezoshosting.com/cs/

I have always been a welly man myself. They are superb in wet grass, let
alone lagoons of pig shit.      - Julian Macassey

-- 
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
[Index of Archives]     [Older Fedora Users]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Package Announce]     [EPEL Announce]     [Fedora Magazine]     [Fedora News]     [Fedora Summer Coding]     [Fedora Laptop]     [Fedora Cloud]     [Fedora Advisory Board]     [Fedora Education]     [Fedora Security]     [Fedora Scitech]     [Fedora Robotics]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Infrastructure]     [Fedora Websites]     [Anaconda Devel]     [Fedora Devel Java]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora Fonts]     [ATA RAID]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Management Tools]     [Fedora Mentors]     [SSH]     [Fedora Package Review]     [Fedora R Devel]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kickstart]     [Fedora Music]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Centos]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Fedora Legal]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora OCaml]     [Coolkey]     [Virtualization Tools]     [ET Management Tools]     [Yum Users]     [Tux]     [Yosemite News]     [Gnome Users]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Art]     [Fedora Docs]     [Asterisk PBX]     [Fedora Sparc]     [Fedora Universal Network Connector]     [Libvirt Users]     [Fedora ARM]

  Powered by Linux