> >> >> If you hit that limit you should see errors from various network API. File a >> bug report if you find some API that causing weird crashes instead of >> failing gracefully or halting with an appropriate error message when you run >> out of file descriptors. > > Well I'm seeing EXC_GUARD. Is that considered "graceful"? From the user's > perspective it isn't, because it causes summary termination of the app which > is almost always reported as "it crashed, wah!, you suck!". Ultimately this > should propagate up to the NSURLSession API in some way - e.g. by returning > nil instead of an object if it can't create its resources. I think one > problem there is that the API is asynchronous - it creates the object which > then starts a thread to open the socket - that's what the stack trace implies > anyway. That would make it hard to simply not return a valid object. Not sure > what the right design would be there - that's one for the networking > architects to ponder I guess. >
I don’t think that’s very graceful, no. Since the only ‘documentation’ on EXC_GUARD seems to be in the replies in devforums it’s hard to say exactly what the contract is. However that reply, to my reading, indicates means someone called a normal filehandle method on a guarded filehandle, ie violating the guard. The header file says this #define EXC_GUARD 12 /* Violated guarded resource protections */ Whereas what you seem to have here is ‘filesystem call to a guarded resource failed in some normal way I could have reported properly’. Yes you’re out of filehandles and so there’s a failure, would have been much more useful to have the original failure code logged [EMFILE] than EXC_GUARD which (again to my reading) means something entirely different and is misleading. So I’d file a bug against that one. By the way - where do all these disparate max numbers of filehandles come from? I see the launchd one, makes sense, stuff launched from bash inherits bash’s 2560, stuff launched from finder on my box also gets 2560 (why), Xcode has its own ideas, which I suppose makes some sense as debugged processes probably need more handles and whatever Graham did to launch his process in this case got 256, which I haven’t yet found a way to get a process on 10.10 to do by default yet barring making launchd launch it. _______________________________________________ Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com) Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list. Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
