Aaron Bannert wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 18, 2001 at 02:26:25PM -0500, Jeff Trawick wrote: > > > s/HardServerLimit/SoftServerLimit/ ? I'm only suggesting this since > > > the semantics of HARD_SERVER_LIMIT != HardServerLimit. > > > > I hear what you're saying but I am not crazy about > > "SoftServerLimit"/"SoftThreadLimit". Somebody please +1 Aaron's > > suggestion and I'll eagerly comply! (Maybe I'll comply anyway... just > > not comfortable yet...) > > I'm not crazy about "SoftServerLimit" either, but I think we'd be better > off with something not similiar to HARD_SERVER_LIMIT.
ServerLimit ? Greg
