https://bugs.dragonflybsd.org/https://bugs.dragonflybsd.org/favicon.ico?16293952082009-05-06T16:57:47ZDragonFlyBSD bugtrackerDragonFlyBSD - Bug #1328: [PATCH]https://bugs.dragonflybsd.org/issues/1328?journal_id=65352009-05-06T16:57:47Zalexh
<ul></ul><p>In my opinion this should be fixed in FreeSWITCH by changing RLIMIT_AS to <br />RLIMIT_VMEM. If this is in pkgsrc, it should be fixed there.<br />Neither NetBSD nor OpenBSD have RLIMIT_AS and there is no need for it if it'll be <br />just the same as RLIMIT_VMEM.</p> DragonFlyBSD - Bug #1328: [PATCH]https://bugs.dragonflybsd.org/issues/1328?journal_id=65462009-05-08T13:44:50Zalexh
<ul></ul><p>I've just seen that RLIMIT_AS is actually POSIX:<br /><a class="external" href="http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/getrlimit.html">http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/getrlimit.html</a></p>
<p>So we should add it. It'll probably happen during GSoC (POSIX Compliance Project).</p> DragonFlyBSD - Bug #1328: [PATCH]https://bugs.dragonflybsd.org/issues/1328?journal_id=65572009-05-10T00:02:44Zvince.dragonfly
<ul></ul><p>On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 09:57:49AM +0000, Alex Hornung (via DragonFly issue tracker) wrote:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Alex Hornung <<a class="email" href="mailto:ahornung@gmail.com">ahornung@gmail.com</a>> added the comment:</p>
<p>In my opinion this should be fixed in FreeSWITCH by changing RLIMIT_AS to <br />RLIMIT_VMEM. If this is in pkgsrc, it should be fixed there.<br />Neither NetBSD nor OpenBSD have RLIMIT_AS and there is no need for it if it'll be <br />just the same as RLIMIT_VMEM.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Actually, it turns out that NetBSD <strong>does</strong> have it also.</p>
<p>resource.h:<br /> #define RLIMIT_AS 10 /* virtual process size (inclusive of mmap) <strong>/<br /> #define RLIMIT_VMEM RLIMIT_AS /</strong> common alias */</p>
<p>OpenBSD seems to be the only one that does not have it.</p>
<p>By the way, FreeSWITCH is not in pkgsrc. I was trying to compile it<br />natively. However, the RLIMIT_AS issue was not the only one. Every<br />time I fixed one problem there was another. Apparently it is very Linux<br />centric. I don't have a lot of time to work on it so I gave up for now<br />and am going to take a closer look at yate.</p>
<p>On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 06:44:51AM +0000, Alex Hornung (via DragonFly issue tracker) wrote:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Alex Hornung <<a class="email" href="mailto:ahornung@gmail.com">ahornung@gmail.com</a>> added the comment:</p>
<p>I've just seen that RLIMIT_AS is actually POSIX:<br /><a class="external" href="http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/getrlimit.html">http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/getrlimit.html</a></p>
<p>So we should add it. It'll probably happen during GSoC (POSIX Compliance Project).</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Thanks for following up on this. It is looking to me like RLIMIT_AS is (or is<br />becoming?) more of the standard and RLIMIT_VMEM is BSD specific. I do not<br />see any mention of RLIMIT_VMEM in the posix specifications and Linux does not<br />seem to support it either. At least it did not show up when I grep'd the<br />Linux headers under /archive/Linux-2.6.13.1 on leaf for it.</p> DragonFlyBSD - Bug #1328: [PATCH]https://bugs.dragonflybsd.org/issues/1328?journal_id=65592009-05-10T01:56:43Zalexh
<ul></ul><p>RLIMIT_AS definitely seems to be the only real standard here, so I would suggest <br />to add it for POSIX compliance.</p>
<p>This is Beket's expertise, so I'll just leave it like this.</p> DragonFlyBSD - Bug #1328: [PATCH]https://bugs.dragonflybsd.org/issues/1328?journal_id=65602009-05-10T07:47:36ZAnonymous
<ul></ul><p>: RLIMIT_AS definitely seems to be the only real standard here,<br />: so I would suggest to add it for POSIX compliance.<br />:<br />: This is Beket's expertise, so I'll just leave it like this.</p>
<p>Sorry for the delayed response, grabbed!</p>
<p>Cheers,<br />Stathis</p> DragonFlyBSD - Bug #1328: [PATCH]https://bugs.dragonflybsd.org/issues/1328?journal_id=66902009-05-26T14:27:27ZAnonymous
<ul></ul><p>: RLIMIT_AS definitely seems to be the only real standard here,</p>
<p>Anyone any thoughts regarding the attached patch ?</p>
<p>Cheers,<br />Stathis</p> DragonFlyBSD - Bug #1328: [PATCH]https://bugs.dragonflybsd.org/issues/1328?journal_id=67902009-07-03T16:19:02ZAnonymous
<ul></ul><blockquote><blockquote>
<p>RLIMIT_AS definitely seems to be the only real standard here,</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Anyone any thoughts regarding the attached patch ?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Unless no one objects in the next couple of days, I'll push it.</p>
<p>Cheers,<br />Stathis</p> DragonFlyBSD - Bug #1328: [PATCH]https://bugs.dragonflybsd.org/issues/1328?journal_id=67982009-07-06T22:46:22ZAnonymous
<ul></ul><blockquote><blockquote><blockquote>
<p>RLIMIT_AS definitely seems to be the only real standard here,</p>
</blockquote></blockquote></blockquote>
<p>Committed ! <br />a874e0b7827b04e8d4e0d2454639e2fd9aa33220</p> DragonFlyBSD - Bug #1328: [PATCH]https://bugs.dragonflybsd.org/issues/1328?journal_id=68392009-07-16T06:05:15Zdillon
<ul></ul><p>:Stathis Kamperis <<a class="email" href="mailto:ekamperi@gmail.com">ekamperi@gmail.com</a>> added the comment:<br />:<br />:: RLIMIT_AS definitely seems to be the only real standard here,<br />:<br />:Anyone any thoughts regarding the attached patch ?<br />:<br />:Cheers,<br />:Stathis</p>
<pre><code>This might create issues if a pkgsrc package is switch()ing on<br /> the RLIMIT cases and tries to switch on both RLIMIT_VMEM and<br /> RLIMIT_AS.</code></pre>
<pre><code>If RLIMIT_VMEM is not used as much we might be able to just<br /> flat-out rename it to RLIMIT_AS. The question is whether it<br /> would be beneficial to the pkgsrc build or not.</code></pre>
<pre><code>-Matt</code></pre>