Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: [HACKERS] max_files_per_processes vs others uses of filedescriptors - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: [HACKERS] max_files_per_processes vs others uses of filedescriptors
Date
Msg-id 20170807214041.cbgo7khgjinvefay@alap3.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] max_files_per_processes vs others uses of file descriptors  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] max_files_per_processes vs others uses of file descriptors  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tree view 
Hi,

On 2017-08-07 17:30:13 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Meh.  The lack of field complaints about this doesn't indicate to me that
> we have a huge problem, and in any case, just increasing NUM_RESERVED_FDS
> would do nothing for the system-wide limits.

Howso? Via count_usable_fds() we test for max_files_per_process /
RLIMIT_NOFILE fds, and *then* subtract NUM_RESERVED_FDS.

- Andres

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] max_files_per_processes vs others uses of file descriptors
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] ICU collation variant keywords and pg_collation entries(Was: [BUGS] Crash report for some ICU-52 (debian8) COLLATE and work_memvalues)