Looks like you can add the line "ulimit -n 65535" to /etc/default/dbus
... :) https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dbus/+bug/381063/comments/4 Cheers, Jordan David Hopkins wrote: > It appears that the issue is related to this bug: > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dbus/+bug/381063 > > So, how do I set ulimit -n 8192 > > for example to increase the open files limit? Do I need to edit the > /etc/init/dbus.conf file and add this command somewhere? Or is there > some other location that I can make certain that the limit is changed > from 1024 to a larger number? > > I would think this bug would affect more than just me as it seems to > be an issue for ltsp in general. > > Sincerely, > Dave Hopkins > > > On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 1:42 PM, David Hopkins <[email protected]> wrote: >> Jordan, >> >> Thanks for the link but I don't think it is that issue as I'm not >> getting error messages in the log files. Running dpkg >> --get-selections shows that the two systems have exactly the same >> packages installed. I have between 40 and 50 users logged onto the >> server at any given time. It is rather random as the system can run >> fine for a day or so and then suddenly have this issue. >> >> I have already rebuilt the server once a few weeks ago. That was when >> I made certain that is was a 'clone' of the other server. I used the >> --get-selections and --set-selections to ensure that apt installed >> only those packages. >> >> The only clue I have at present is that npviewer.bin (flash?) will >> segfault at times though the system doesn't misbehave when this >> happens. It is probably just one line in a log file that I haven't >> located which the clue I need, but if I can't resolve it quickly, I'll >> probably have to try upgrading the systems to Lucid (10.04) although >> from some traffic on the lists, it seems lucid comes with its own set >> of issues. >> >> Thanks! >> Dave ... >> >> On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Jordan Erickson >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Hi David, >>> >>> If 1 of 2 servers is experiencing this issue, and nobody else has chimed >>> in yet to say they're having the same problem, I'd have to assume it's >>> something very particular to your one server's setup.. A couple of >>> questions: >>> >>> - Is this happening with specific users, only before/after login, ...? >>> - Have you checked logs on the terminals themselves? >>> - Just a shot in the dark (google in the dark?) but have you seen >>> comments 11 & 12 at >>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/debian/+source/pulseaudio/+bug/390528 ? >>> >>> I'm sure there's a solution to your problem. The important thing IMHO is >>> to do as much research on your issue as possible and not let the school >>> director think that it's unsolvable. Worst case scenario you could >>> always wipe/re-install the system. Going back to an unsupported LTSP 4.2 >>> probably isn't your best option. >>> >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Jordan >>> >>> >>> On 09/16/2010 05:12 AM, David Hopkins wrote: >>>> I am still having issues with the dbus-daemon randomly consuming 100% >>>> of the cpu on my servers which renders them unusable. There doesn't >>>> appear to be any messages in the logs but the school director has now >>>> stopped by and asked if it wouldn't be simpler to go back to the RHEL5 >>>> with LTSP4.2 instead of staying with Ubuntu. He is very supportive of >>>> using LTSP and for him to ask this is a serious concern. >>>> >>>> Does anyone have any ideas about why the dbus-daemon would suddenly >>>> spike to 100% cpu usage and hang the system? The load average can be >>>> very low (4-5 on a dual-quad) and yet the system is completely >>>> nonresponsive? >>>> >>>> Sincerely, >>>> Dave Hopkins >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 3:01 PM, David Hopkins <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> Has anyone noticed dbus (messagebus) using 100% of a CPU on an LTSP >>>>> server? I have two identical servers both hardware and software >>>>> (Karmic 9.10, comparing output from dpkg --get-selections). However, >>>>> one server runs flawlessly, the other shows dbus_daemon using 100% of >>>>> a CPU. Also, memory usage slowly climbs until the system begins using >>>>> virtual memory and everything then comes to a halt. Both systems >>>>> connect to the same brand of switch, both connect to a KVM. The only >>>>> differences are in the client systems that they serve. One servers >>>>> GX150/GX240s while the other (the misbehaving system) serves >>>>> GX50/GX110/GX150's. I'm in the process of replacing the GX50 systems >>>>> and as many GX110's as possible, but curious if anyone has noticed >>>>> this issue. >>>>> >>>>> Sincerely, >>>>> Dave Hopkins >>>>> Newark Charter School >>>>> Newark Delaware >>>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Jordan Erickson - LNS >>> (707) 636-5678 - http://logicalnetworking.net >>> >>> -- >>> edubuntu-users mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: >>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/edubuntu-users >>> -- Jordan Erickson - LNS (707) 636-5678 - http://logicalnetworking.net -- edubuntu-users mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/edubuntu-users
