From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ian Jackson Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] tools/xenconsoled: Increase file descriptor limit Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2015 16:30:33 +0000 Message-ID: <21734.4009.740481.828551@mariner.uk.xensource.com> References: <20150217164811.GI2159@zion.uk.xensource.com> <1424195752-10842-1-git-send-email-andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> <20150219110457.GQ2159@zion.uk.xensource.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20150219110457.GQ2159@zion.uk.xensource.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Wei Liu Cc: Andrew Cooper , Ian Campbell , Xen-devel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Wei Liu writes ("Re: [PATCH v3] tools/xenconsoled: Increase file descriptor limit"): > On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 05:55:52PM +0000, Andrew Cooper wrote: > > XenServer's VM density testing uncovered a regression when moving from > > sysvinit to systemd where the file descriptor limit dropped from 4096 to > > 1024. (XenServer had previously inserted a ulimit statement into its > > initscripts.) I think that putting something like this in the initscripts is a good idea. I don't like the idea of this kind of resource limit mangling (quite vigorous, too!) being buried in the C code. > > One solution is to use LimitNOFILE=4096 in xenconsoled.service to match the > > lost ulimit, but that is only a stopgap solution. Why is this only a stopgap solution ? > > As Xenconsoled genuinely needs a large number of file descriptors > > if a large number of domains are running, and is well behaved with > > its descriptors, attempt to up the limit to the system maximum. Perhaps you mean it should be "unlimited" but that doesn't seem right either. The value should be some multiple of the maximum number of domains. Ian.