On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 12:57 PM, Arto Bendiken <email address hidden> wrote:
> Michael, thanks for looking into this.
>
> In answer to your question: yes, it caused the IPC mechanism in the
> database engine my company develops (dydra.com) to break, causing not a
> little aggravation. While we don't need millions of message queues, we
> had been relying on having at least a few thousand, and 1024 is just too
> low a hard limit. As we can't possibly require a custom-built kernel to
> run our software, we are now contemplating switching from POSIX to SysV
> message queues instead. Not a happy day...
Arto, I don't think you should be doing that. The upstream kernel
broke user space here, and I am sure that was not intended. I would
imagine that an upstream fix that repairs your problem would probably
be accepted. How about we pursue that line instead?
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 12:57 PM, Arto Bendiken <email address hidden> wrote:
> Michael, thanks for looking into this.
>
> In answer to your question: yes, it caused the IPC mechanism in the
> database engine my company develops (dydra.com) to break, causing not a
> little aggravation. While we don't need millions of message queues, we
> had been relying on having at least a few thousand, and 1024 is just too
> low a hard limit. As we can't possibly require a custom-built kernel to
> run our software, we are now contemplating switching from POSIX to SysV
> message queues instead. Not a happy day...
Arto, I don't think you should be doing that. The upstream kernel
broke user space here, and I am sure that was not intended. I would
imagine that an upstream fix that repairs your problem would probably
be accepted. How about we pursue that line instead?
-- www.kernel. org/doc/ man-pages/ man7.org/ tlpi/
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://
Author of "The Linux Programming Interface"; http://