Re: persisting the slotmem (Was: Re: mod_proxy: maximum hostname length for workers)

2013-11-09 Thread Daniel Ruggeri
On 11/8/2013 12:42 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > This has me thinking... we should likely do something to > better error-check the store/restore aspects of slotmem. > Even some sort of quick checksum would be better than > what we have now. :/ > > Gotta mull this over a bit more. +1 to that. I couldn

Re: RLIMIT_NPROC on Linux?

2013-11-09 Thread Eric Covener
See also PR#55763 -- root has a soft limit of 1024 ulimit -u on RHEL6. On Sat, Nov 9, 2013 at 7:46 AM, Eric Covener wrote: > Behavior seems to be that after the setuid, we don't get the new users > limits -- we just get a one-time check to make sure our currently > single-thread process won't pu

Re: RLIMIT_NPROC on Linux?

2013-11-09 Thread Eric Covener
Behavior seems to be that after the setuid, we don't get the new users limits -- we just get a one-time check to make sure our currently single-thread process won't push us over the new users' limit. Confirmed in /proc/$pid/limits on a child in start_threads() that roots limit is in place. On Sat,

RLIMIT_NPROC on Linux?

2013-11-09 Thread Eric Covener
I was looking at a typical apr_thread_create failure for creating a large # of threads on a system, and the only solution was to increase roots RLIMIT_NPROC as opposed to the (httpd.conf configured) "User" limits But every manpage I read says that after the setuid(), we should have the new users