On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 12:55 PM, Kay Sievers <k...@vrfy.org> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Umut Tezduyar <u...@tezduyar.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 1:58 AM, Lennart Poettering >> <lenn...@poettering.net> wrote: > >>> We though about just bumping this globally via sysctl, but we feared >>> that might not sit well with some folks, as we shouldn't change a global >>> setting just because one user of it would benefit, especially given that >>> we don't know the effect this might have on others... >> >> I want to go this route and I think it is not possible at the moment >> due to undetermined start order between syslog.socket and >> systemd-sysctl.service. Can we change that? > > It really makes more sense to add a socket option to the kernel to > allow a privileged process to bump the limit for the one socket > setsockopt() is called, and not change and rely on a global > system-wide value affecting the entire system. > > Kay
We are totally on the same page on having a per-socket limit but I am guessing this change is not going to happen tomorrow. Even if it did, adopting the new kernel will also take some time. It would be nice to have a solution meanwhile. Umut _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
