From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Sixt Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Feb 2011, #07; Mon, 28) Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2011 07:49:51 +0100 Message-ID: <4D6DE88F.9030001@viscovery.net> References: <7vbp1vfy5f.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <7voc5uenmy.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kusmabite@gmail.com, git@vger.kernel.org, "Shawn O. Pearce" To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Mar 02 07:50:04 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Pufsq-0001oU-94 for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Wed, 02 Mar 2011 07:50:04 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754789Ab1CBGt6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Mar 2011 01:49:58 -0500 Received: from lilzmailso01.liwest.at ([212.33.55.23]:44580 "EHLO lilzmailso02.liwest.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753014Ab1CBGt5 (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Mar 2011 01:49:57 -0500 Received: from cpe228-254-static.liwest.at ([81.10.228.254] helo=theia.linz.viscovery) by lilzmailso02.liwest.at with esmtpa (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Pufse-0006h3-GF; Wed, 02 Mar 2011 07:49:52 +0100 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (J6T.linz.viscovery [192.168.1.95]) by theia.linz.viscovery (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27F961660F; Wed, 2 Mar 2011 07:49:52 +0100 (CET) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; de; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7 In-Reply-To: <7voc5uenmy.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.4 (-) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Am 3/1/2011 18:50, schrieb Junio C Hamano: > Erik Faye-Lund writes: >> There's also the added complication that _open_osfhandle also seems to >> be limited by this 2048 limit (see the third comment here: >> http://bugs.mysql.com/bug.php?id=24509). We use this function for >> pipes and sockets as well. This alone might be a reason to corner-case >> test the resulting binary on Windows properly. > > As long as the use of osfhandles for non filedescriptors is reasonably > bounded, it may be enough to make the 25 slop configurable per platform, > no? It's not necessary to complicate things. The file descriptors acquired with _open_osfhandle are (only) used in the implementation of pipe() and socket() and count towards the limit no more and no less than the file descriptors acquired with pipe() and socket() on Unix. -- Hannes