Glad this worked. I have been in meetings since I sent it, so I haven't
had time to look at this yet. I will look at it as soon as I go home
(expect about 8 pm PST). I expect this is the correct fix, and we will
have to fix the min_spare variable. When I commit a fix, I will have a
full explanation.
Ryan
On Thu, 28 Jun 2001, Cliff Woolley wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Jun 2001, Dale Ghent wrote:
>
> > > That seems to work fine on HP-UX 11.0.. I'll get back on the
> > > results on IPF (or IA64).
> >
> > That did the trick on Solaris 8, as well.
>
> Same here. I haven't taken much time to look at yesterday's change to
> threaded.c, but this suggested fix doesn't quite "feel" right to me. If
> we test the number of idle threads against maxspare*maxdaemons, doesn't
> that mean that we can have way more idle threads per process available
> than we should if we have less than the max number of daemons running
> currently? Also, there's a test that follows that which checks the
> number of idle threads against minspare... something needs to get done to
> that too, I'm guessing.
>
> I will have to take more time to absorb these latest changes...
>
> --Cliff
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> Cliff Woolley
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Charlottesville, VA
>
>
>
>
_____________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Covalent Technologies [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
