running memcached in daemon mode vs locking down memory

[Brad Fitzpatrick]

Alan, somebody,

Want to look into this?  (I'm told it was sent to the list, but was
eaten....)


On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 2:36 PM, Gary Zhu <Gzhu at ironplanet.com> wrote:

>  Is there any reason to NOT lock down paged memory, when running memcached
> as daemon ?
>
>
>
> With current code, -d will effectively ignore –k.
>
>
>
> I re-arranged the current code as following:
>
> From:
>
>    mlockall
>
>  setuid
>
>  daemon
>
>   …child process…
>
>  init
>
>
>
> To :
>
> daemon
>
>  …child process …
>
> mlockall
>
> setuid
>
> init
>
>
>
> This made –d to work with –k.
>
>
>
> The reason is that forked child process does not inherit mlock.  The
> modified code worked as expected on Solaris 10 and Linux 2.6.x .
>
>
>
> Let me know any downside of the change.
>
>
>
> -  Gary
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.danga.com/pipermail/memcached/attachments/20080611/997b6b07/attachment.htm