Warning: mysqli::__construct(): (HY000/1203): User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\includes\artfuncs.php on line 21
Failed to connect to MySQL: (1203) User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connectionsPath: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!panix!.POSTED.spitfire.i.gajendra.net!not-for-mail From: cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: Threads (was Re: MSI interrupts) Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2025 01:44:04 -0000 (UTC) Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC Message-ID: References: Injection-Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2025 01:44:04 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: reader1.panix.com; posting-host="spitfire.i.gajendra.net:166.84.136.80"; logging-data="27362"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@panix.com" X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test77 (Sep 1, 2010) Originator: cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) In article , Scott Lurndal wrote: >cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) writes: >>In article , >>Scott Lurndal wrote: >>>Dan Cross wrote: >>>>[snip] >>>> For instance, consider Unix/POSIX `open`: from an API >>>> perspective this simply maps a symbolic file path name to a file >>>> descriptor that can subsequently be used to perform IO on the >>>> named file. While it is well-known that the interface is >>>> defined so that it can block opening some kinds of devices, for >>>> example, some terminal devices until the line is asserted, that >>>> is not the usual case, and noteably `open` does no IO on the >>>> file itself. So generally, most programs would expect that it >>>> has no reason to block. >>> >>>The one case where open was a problem on traditional unix was >>>for line printers. The open of /dev/lp could block if the >>>printer (on a centronics port) was not-ready. And it was >>>an uninterruptable block, even SIGKILL was blocked. >> >>I'd worry more about, say a pathname that requires traversing >>NFS for one reason or another (symlinks, or just on a mounted >>filesystem). Nothing prevents an NFS server from becoming >>inaccessible during a lookup. > >However, you can specify a soft mount rather than a hard mount >to resolve that. To kill the process, sure. Still kinda sucks, though, from a user experience point of view. :-) - Dan C.