Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!nctuccca.edu.tw!news.cc.nctu.edu.tw!news.sinica!taob
From: taob@gate.sinica.edu.tw (Brian Tao)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Zombie processes eating up CPU time (was Re: Internet Service Provider)
Date: 27 May 1995 05:55:57 GMT
Organization: Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Academia Sinica
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <3q6etd$nkc@gate.sinica.edu.tw>
References: <3pqb92$lq2@pt9201.ped.pto.ford.com> <D941A5.659@twwells.com> <3q2k6c$lvn@nntp.msstate.edu> <D95LMu.JzG@twwells.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: @140.109.40.249
In article <D95LMu.JzG@twwells.com>, T. William Wells <bill@twwells.com> wrote:
>
>It is a *bad* solution. It requires *more* effort than any
>workable solution
If your workable solution requires less effort than typing in a
few lines in an /etc/csh.login file, then why don't you do it?
>-- and will cause endless headaches as various
>things break. There is also a maze of administrative headaches
>that would have to be negotiated.
Name some examples. On an ISP, at any rate, I can't really think
of an instance where a user will require more than, say, 15 minutes of
CPU time for a single process. Anything that runs in the long-term
will likely be owned by root/sys/news/daemon/etc.
>"Nice", in my book, means not offering ill-thought out and
>potentially dangerous "solutions" to problems. The proposed
>solution is both of those.
Considering the ease of implementation and its wide application,
I'd say it's a pretty good solution. Then in the meantime, you can
work on your "better solution". Don't forget to let the rest of us
mere mortals know about it when you're done. :-P
--
Brian ("Though this be madness, yet there is method in't") Tao
taob@gate.sinica.edu.tw <-- work ........ play --> taob@io.org