aglew@urbsdc.UUCP (05/19/88)
>>I am just curious: >>What is the maximum number of simultaneously open buffered files >>under aux? Can it be changed? > >Well, in A/UX we chose to have as many open file descriptors (and hence >open buffered files) as possible. The select system call, in a way, >set a "reasoable" limit of 32 files. Thus, you can have up to 32 >file descriptors (and 32 buffered files) open. Actually 29 when you >remember that stdin, stdout, and stderr are already open. Yes, it can be >changed - increasing it will make it hard for select to work :-). BSD 4.3 select uses an array, so that the size of an int is not a limit on the number of open file descriptors.
phil@Apple.COM (Phil Ronzone) (05/22/88)
In article <45600001@urbsdc> aglew@urbsdc.Urbana.Gould.COM writes: >BSD 4.3 select uses an array, so that the size of an int is >not a limit on the number of open file descriptors. A most curious thing, folks. I responded to a query as to the maximum open file descriptors per process in A/UX, and replied 32, along with a description of WHY it is 32 (i.e., not just a random number). (The reason was that the 4.1c/4.2 code base we were taking from at the time ignored anything after the first 32-bit int in the array given to the select() system call. So we picked 32, as we knew that 20 was just a little bit on the insufficient side). Anyway, although aglew above is a neutral reply, many of the direct mail responses seemed to be of flavor "YOU *%^&#$@ IDIOT, ANY CRETIN KNOWS THAT BSD 4.3 SELECT ALLOWS AN ARRAY OF INTEGERS .... YOU FOOL". And so on. === FUN PART ON === So, did I say something wrong or forget to use my mouthwash when I sent that article? Or are there a number of near brain-dead flameoids who sleep passively at their terminals, and stumble semi-coherently into nasty replies when a random key word or two (SELECT, 32 FILE DESCRIPTORS, LIMIT, ..) passes before their glazed eyes to satisfy their infinitesmal egos, without pausing to realize that A/UX ain't BSD 4.3, and that maybe a signature line mentioning A/UX System Architect may know something (I did have a signature line on that one, didn't I???) etc. maybe they all hate System V? :-) === FUN PART OFF === Ah, I always wanted to do that. Anyway, that was WHY we set initial limits of 32. Maybe it is not viewed important by some (many?) on the net, but we'd like to explain WHY we did certain things on A/UX and engage in civilized discourse. Actual use of four-letter words in replies, well, tsk tsk and don't discourage us boys and girls!!! Or we'll stop reading comp.sys.aux! :-) On other subjects (like rec.humor, here is the obligatory item) -- Thanks to all of those who replied on our request on what YOU'D like to see Apple do on handling HFS filesystems under A/UX. The summary is: 21 replies to date. Mount HFS filesystems (VNODE or equivalent) as UNIX filesystems ........ 19 Incoherent ............................................................. 1 Mount HFS filesystems running under Mac OS via AppleShare under A/UX ... 1 The result of your replies was to change some up in the air "things to do" thoughts into let's put this on the projecvt list. ALTHOUGH WE CAN'T PROMISE ANYTHING BECAUSE PRIORITIES CHANGE AND SOMETHINGS THINGS BECOME UNFEASIBLE, ANY THUS MAYBE WE'LL NEVER EVER DO IT ANYWAY, we have decided to try/look into making HFS filesystems supported under A/UX by mounting them. We are serious enough that if you have extensive VNODE kernel experience AND extensive HFS and Mac OS knowledge, send me a resume. We listened, and some of those 19 replies were very well thought out. Thanks to you all. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Philip K. Ronzone A/UX System Architect Apple Computer MS 27AJ 10500 N. DeAnza Blvd. Cupertino CA 95014 {amdahl,decwrl,sun,voder,nsc,mtxinu,dual,unisoft}!apple!phil "In A/UX Release 4.0, /bin will still be there ...." P. Zigbooli
zdenko@csd4.milw.wisc.edu (Zdenko Tomasic) (05/22/88)
In article <10744@apple.Apple.Com> phil@apple.UUCP (Phil Ronzone) writes: > >A most curious thing, folks. I responded to a query as to the maximum >open file descriptors per process in A/UX, and replied 32, along with a >description of WHY it is 32 (i.e., not just a random number). (The reason >was that the 4.1c/4.2 code base we were taking from at the time ignored >anything after the first 32-bit int in the array given to the select() >system call. So we picked 32, as we knew that 20 was just a little bit >on the insufficient side). > >Anyway, although aglew above is a neutral reply, many of the direct mail >responses seemed to be of flavor "YOU *%^&#$@ IDIOT, ANY CRETIN KNOWS >THAT BSD 4.3 SELECT ALLOWS AN ARRAY OF INTEGERS .... YOU FOOL". And so on. > Don't get discouraged Phil! I thank you for your response and find it useful as well as the subsequent discussions which often go off on a tangent. We all learn through confusion and disscusion even when it only adds to misconceptions or misunderstanding. Everything gets cleared up eventually regardless of tempers and moods people find themselves in while reading newsgroups. >Philip K. Ronzone A/UX System Architect >Apple Computer MS 27AJ 10500 N. DeAnza Blvd. Cupertino CA 95014 >{amdahl,decwrl,sun,voder,nsc,mtxinu,dual,unisoft}!apple!phil >"In A/UX Release 4.0, /bin will still be there ...." P. Zigbooli Hang in there and keep the communication lanes open, flames will eventually subside as you improve AUX listening to the UNIX community at large. Thanks again! Zdenko Tomasic UWM, Chem. Dept. Milwaukee,WI,53201 __________________________________________________________ UUCP: ihnp4!uwmcsd1!uwmcsd4!zdenko ARPA: zdenko@csd4.milw.wisc.edu __________________________________________________________
rfortier@palladium.UUCP (Richard W. Fortier) (05/23/88)
In article <10744@apple.Apple.Com> phil@apple.UUCP (Phil Ronzone) writes: >So, did I say something wrong or forget to use my mouthwash when I sent that >article? I'd like to add my vote of confidence to the others. I think you are doing a terrific job, Phil; don't let the flames of those who are incapable of understanding that a first release is not the last release get you down. Also, the restraint with which you respond to undeserved (or even deserved) flamage is a credit to you and to Apple. >ALTHOUGH WE CAN'T PROMISE >ANYTHING BECAUSE PRIORITIES CHANGE AND SOMETHINGS THINGS BECOME UNFEASIBLE, >ANY THUS MAYBE WE'LL NEVER EVER DO IT ANYWAY, we have decided to try/look into >making HFS filesystems supported under A/UX by mounting them. Of course you can't promise this; it will take considerable effort and expense to implement it, a "real world" constraint that many of the flamers neglect (or even refuse) to take into account. At least you, as Apple's representative, are listening; more than you can say for most of the other companies. Keep up the good work. -- --- Richard W. Fortier, Epoch Systems Inc. (617) 481-3717 313 Boston Post Rd. West, Marlboro MA 01752 {linus!alliant, harvard!cfisun}!palladium!rfortier