Re: Remote pid with SOCK_DGRAM local socket

To: Thor Lancelot Simon <tls%panix.com@localhost>, Emmanuel Dreyfus <manu%netbsd.org@localhost>, Matthew Mondor <mm_lists%pulsar-zone.net@localhost>, tech-userlevel%netbsd.org@localhost
Subject: Re: Remote pid with SOCK_DGRAM local socket
From: David Holland <dholland-tech%netbsd.org@localhost>
Date: Sat, 14 May 2011 20:08:17 +0000

On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 02:16:00PM +0100, David Laight wrote:
 > Since NetBSD won't reuse a pid immediately, a slightly stale pid number
 > is almost certainly not a problem.

...for ever-decreasing values of "not immediately". It doesn't take
that long to cycle through 32768 processes any more, and I think we're
pretty soon going to have to take the plunge and go to 32-bit pids.

-- 
David A. Holland
dholland%netbsd.org@localhost

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Remote pid with SOCK_DGRAM local socket
  - From: David Laight

References:
- Re: Remote pid with SOCK_DGRAM local socket
  - From: Matthew Mondor
- Re: Remote pid with SOCK_DGRAM local socket
  - From: Emmanuel Dreyfus
- Re: Remote pid with SOCK_DGRAM local socket
  - From: Thor Lancelot Simon
- Re: Remote pid with SOCK_DGRAM local socket
  - From: David Laight

Prev by Date: Re: Filesystem Hierarchy Standard (FHS) and NetBSD
Next by Date: Re: getting creative with cp (was Re: cp -n diff)
Previous by Thread: Re: Remote pid with SOCK_DGRAM local socket
Next by Thread: Re: Remote pid with SOCK_DGRAM local socket
Indexes:

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index