On Wed, 25 Sep 2002, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 02:11:59AM +0200, Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote: > > -> Makes the wait loop no longer endless - but causes it > > to bail out (and emit some warnings ahead of time) after > > a couple of thousand consequituve EINTRs. > > Placing a 'magic number' on how many EINTRs is 'failure' doesn't > seem right. -- justin I could not agree more. The original patch used 'time' - but that is expensive to calculate. If you make a histogram of conseq EINTR over a few weeks you find that sequences longer than 5-10 are very rare on a healthy machine. But once something runs out of control (say a PHP/sql connector) it shoots in the hundreds and thousands for just a single process quickly. Suggestions for a better metric (Short of making it self learning ;-). Dw
