>>> >>> like I asked and no one answered: where >>>can I check HARD LIMIT of my >>> computer? >> >> you can't really. you can try increasing >>until you run into problems and back >> off a bit, but it probably depends on what >>else the kernel is doing. usual >> approach is to restrict the software to >>using the resources that you expect it >> to actually need and restrict it from making >>more demands than that to orotect >> the rest of the system.
>this sounds like a bug to me >hard limit must be known, else is like playing >cards, you never know when you >lose (you crash) >and no one answered my question yet about >i2pd's connections to other routhers >with can well surpass 8192 up to +30000 >connections, and if I am right then >each connection needs a FD? I worked with >networking and programming a little, >so this makes sense to me can anyone >verify? >if yes, then yes this is a bug and I am >disappointed that the only way is to >run blindly and trust before crash I might be out of line here since I’m new to OS dev stuff, but what you’re asking doesn’t really make sense to me. A file descriptor is a software abstraction built onto the hardware and the exact implementation changes from case to case dependent on hardware. It’s like if I asked my doctor “give me the exact limit of bicep curls I can do in an hour.” In the same way the body has no conception of a bicep curl(only the fatigue from moving), the hardware doesn’t know what you mean by a file descriptor(only the residual resources needed to maintain one), and there’s like 20 ways of doing a bicep curl, so demanding such a concrete hard limit number makes no sense. - Bruce On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 6:52 AM <beecdadd...@danwin1210.de> wrote: > On Tue, January 30, 2024 11:23 am, Stuart Henderson wrote: > > On 2024/01/30 10:53, beecdadd...@danwin1210.de wrote: > > > >> I see the confusion I made I am sorry, when I said routers crash I meant > >> actual ISP hardware routers. > > > > For an ISP "customer premises equipment" router (home/officr router)? > > That often means you made too many connections and exceeded the size of > > NAT/firewall state table that they can cope with. Also for ISPs with > > CGN, you might have a limited port-range that you're allowed to use and > > can't make more connections once that has been exceeded. > > is there way to verify it's the 1st thing, which can be fixed by custom > router, yes? > any computer with 2 NICs can be a OpenBSD router, yes? I seen people do > that, > is cool > > > > >> like I asked and no one answered: where can I check HARD LIMIT of my > >> computer? > > > > you can't really. you can try increasing until you run into problems and > back > > off a bit, but it probably depends on what else the kernel is doing. > usual > > approach is to restrict the software to using the resources that you > expect it > > to actually need and restrict it from making more demands than that to > orotect > > the rest of the system. > > this sounds like a bug to me > hard limit must be known, else is like playing cards, you never know when > you > lose (you crash) > and no one answered my question yet about i2pd's connections to other > routhers > with can well surpass 8192 up to +30000 connections, and if I am right then > each connection needs a FD? I worked with networking and programming a > little, > so this makes sense to me can anyone verify? > if yes, then yes this is a bug and I am disappointed that the only way is > to > run blindly and trust before crash > > > > >> what it depends on, on CPU? where is utility that shows max FDs, and > >> per-running-process FD usage and their max setting? if this does not > exist, > >> I think why not? > >> I think if user has to manually set FD limits and know potential of > programs > >> and OpenBSD and hardware, where is utility to help with that? I did > search > >> on the internet, all shit.. > > > > fstat shows per-process FD use, but the kernel backend for it is a bit > buggy > > and can sometimes crash the kernel, so it is best to avoid running it on > an > > important system. > > > > > > oh really > I probably cannot verify the usage of I2Pd if it exceeds 8192 because my > router goes stupid and crashes, can you? > if you can't I'll give it a try, please tell me if you can.. I would try > increasing bandwidth speed to X and transit tunnels to maybe 10k, try with > a > floodfill maybe, too.. because even many tunnels - there can be many to 1 > i2pd > peer(i2pd router) which translates to 1 FD, right? > and if you go to web console of i2pd and go to Transit Tunnels tab, you > can see > => [some number like ID] 5.0 KiB, and then you see more of same, but the > arrow > '=>' is not there, so that maybe indicates it's the same peer/i2pd router > that > the following tunnels are to/from.. most have 1 tunnel, some have 6 > tunnels, a > lot have 2 tunnels > > but I am not getting FD count with fstat, the number is not the same with > 'Routers' in web console of i2pd, so maybe I was wrong > or maybe i2pd recycles FDs to be much better at efficiency > so it has Routers stored addresses somewhere, and makes connections only if > needed (which take up FD spots) > > > > > - best regards, I like talking to you, you care about this and want to > help, > it can be seen > >
