On Friday October 17, jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > I'm OK with that too. I just used this since Neil suggested it. I have > no idea what a reasonable value should really be. I suppose this should > probably be set to the maximum number of clients we expect to support > (assuming 1 connection to lockd from each client). I suggested it (using the NFILE rlimit) because I was looking for a natural way to make it configurable, and asked myself "how would this be handled by a user-space daemon". I managed to address one of those questions, but not really the more useful one. > > > What would actually happen if we allowed too many connections? What > > would fail first? Is there some way to detect that situation and use > > that to drop connections? > > > > I'm not clear on this either. Here's my naive take (could be very > wrong): I've got no really idea either. But when we are building network-facing software, you need to be cautious and use the "deny unless explicitly permitted" approached. It may be safe to allow an arbitrarily large number of connections. But until you can be certain of that you should fail-safe and impose a limit. NeilBrown -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
