Message195348
| Author | tarek |
|---|---|
| Recipients | christian.heimes, hynek, jcea, neologix, pitrou, tarek, vstinner |
| Date | 2013-08-16.16:19:12 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1376669952.75.0.874930027417.issue18756@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
> If os.urandom() doesn't fail, something else will fail soon after. the random pool can be exhausted, but this is not "soon after" I think. In Linux and Mac OS X, ulimit -n defaults to 512 and 256. It's very easy to reach that limit if you write a web app that uses this API. > I agree with Antoine. Exhausting the FDs is not the problem, Do you suggest that we should not use os.urandom on high load ? Opening an FD on every call sounds under optimal, I am not seeing any drawback not to try to optimize that API. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2013-08-16 16:19:12 | tarek | set | recipients: + tarek, jcea, pitrou, vstinner, christian.heimes, neologix, hynek |
| 2013-08-16 16:19:12 | tarek | set | messageid: <1376669952.75.0.874930027417.issue18756@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2013-08-16 16:19:12 | tarek | link | issue18756 messages |
| 2013-08-16 16:19:12 | tarek | create | |