On 04/10/2019 01:31 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote: > On Wed, 10 Apr 2019, Bueso wrote: > >> On Wed, 10 Apr 2019, Waiman Long wrote: >>> 2) I want to avoid the extreme case that there are more than 32k >>> readers >>> in the wait queue and make the count overflow. >> >> But in this case the readers are already on the queue. > > Never mind this. > > But the limit could still be enlarged just to prevent overflows in the > case > where there are only readers.
The limit is kind of arbitrary. We can certainly increase it if 256 is seemed too low. Cheers, Longman