delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi   search  
Mail Archives: cygwin/2007/05/28/06:52:32

X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Message-ID: <BAY139-F284D7C51AFFF5F5C003C9FC280@phx.gbl>
X-Sender: nick_telepneff AT hotmail DOT com
From: "Nick Telepneff" <nick_telepneff AT hotmail DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: 1.5.21: inetd telnet connections: fork error
Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 10:52:08 +0000
Mime-Version: 1.0
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

>Nick Telepneff wrote:
>
>>I have installed and run the cygwin inetd telnet server and find that
>>when more than around 16 users connect via telnet the shells start to
>>fail with the following message:
>>16622413 [main] -bash 3868 fork: child -1 - died waiting for longjmp
>>before initialization, retry 0, exit code 0x80, errno 11
>>-bash: fork: Resource temporarily unavailable
>
>Are these connections starting simultaneously?
>
No, these are user telnet sessions.

>>Each session starts a sh.exe, an in.telnetd.exe and one or more
>>application processes (though so far weâve only loaded 2). Each or these
>>processes takes between 4Mb and 10Mb memory according to Windows task
>>Manager.
>>
>>We need to be able to run at least 24 telnet connections using an
>>average of 3 application processes.
>>
>>The machine weâre using is a Xeon processor with 4Gb Ram running Windows
>>2000.
>
>Normal Xeon or one of the new 2-core Xeons?
>
2 core - 4 processors
>>Can anyone help?
>
>Not at this time, if the answer to my first question is yes then perhaps 
>you are
>running into a Windows limitation which AFAIK exists only in XP-SP2; if the
>answer to the second question is yes there has been another thread that 
>reports
>problems with 2-core processors and possible workarounds.

I checked the workarounds and these refer to random fork errors which looked 
promising, although the errors aren't really random.  Using Process Explorer 
to limit the CPU's used, as suggested, didn't do the trick.

Does anyone have a 'plan B'?

Thanks

Nick

_________________________________________________________________
Play your part in making history - Email Britain! 
http://www.emailbritain.co.uk/


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -


  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright © 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019