From scode@hyperion.scode.org  Sun Feb 17 09:01:23 2008
Return-Path: <scode@hyperion.scode.org>
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EE9416A421
	for <FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org>; Sun, 17 Feb 2008 09:01:23 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from scode@hyperion.scode.org)
Received: from hyperion.scode.org (hyperion.scode.org [85.17.42.115])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32B3413C455
	for <FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org>; Sun, 17 Feb 2008 09:01:23 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from scode@hyperion.scode.org)
Received: by hyperion.scode.org (Postfix, from userid 1001)
	id 7529F23C460; Sun, 17 Feb 2008 10:01:21 +0100 (CET)
Message-Id: <20080217090121.7529F23C460@hyperion.scode.org>
Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2008 10:01:21 +0100 (CET)
From: peter.schuller@infidyne.com
Reply-To: peter.schuller@infidyne.com
To: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org
Cc:
Subject: Suggest upping the default kern.ps_arg_cache_limit
X-Send-Pr-Version: 3.113
X-GNATS-Notify:

>Number:         120749
>Category:       kern
>Synopsis:       [request] Suggest upping the default kern.ps_arg_cache_limit
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       non-critical
>Priority:       medium
>Responsible:    freebsd-bugs
>State:          open
>Quarter:        
>Keywords:       
>Date-Required:  
>Class:          change-request
>Submitter-Id:   current-users
>Arrival-Date:   Sun Feb 17 09:10:02 UTC 2008
>Closed-Date:    
>Last-Modified:  Tue May 18 17:40:03 UTC 2010
>Originator:     peter.schuller@infidyne.com
>Release:        FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE-p8 i386
>Organization:
>Environment:
System: FreeBSD hyperion.scode.org 6.2-RELEASE-p8 FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE-p8 #0: Fri Oct 19 05:50:09 CEST 2007 scode@hyperion.scode.org:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC i386
>Description:

I would like to suggest that the default value of kern.ps_arg_cache_limit
be significantly increased. Right now, it is set to PAGE_SIZE / 16, which
is 256 on typical machines.

I do not know enough to determine whether there is a technical reason for
wanting it this low other than just pure memory consumption, but from the
perspective of a user on an even remotely modern system a limit of 256
characters is not very useful. The amount of overhead per process is so
small relative to the likely size of the process that the annoyance of
256 has to overweigh it for me (even if the memory is wired).

I happen to know to change this variable, but the default behavior is
sure to be confusing to new users (expecting ps auxwww | grep XXX to
work). Several real-life non-extreme command lines are longer in this
day and age (and this was true already several years ago). If someone
is running FreeBSD under extremely memory constrictive conditions
(relative to the amount of processes), that, to me, seems sufficiently
exotic that tweaking of the system is necessary.

In short, in an attempt to cater to normal use and the principle of
least surprise, I suggest upping the default value to at least 1024 bytes.

>How-To-Repeat:
>Fix:
Change kern/kern_exec.c. Presumably changing it is less work than applying
a patch, so I am not including one.


>Release-Note:
>Audit-Trail:
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-bugs->freebsd-arch 
Responsible-Changed-By: linimon 
Responsible-Changed-When: Thu Feb 28 22:15:30 UTC 2008 
Responsible-Changed-Why:  
Anyone on the arch@ list want to weigh in on this one? 

http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=120749 
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-arch->freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org 
Responsible-Changed-By: trasz 
Responsible-Changed-When: Mon May 17 12:11:08 UTC 2010 
Responsible-Changed-Why:  
Deassign; mail to arch@ every month is annoying. 


http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=120749 
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org->freebsd-bugs 
Responsible-Changed-By: trasz 
Responsible-Changed-When: Mon May 17 12:49:26 UTC 2010 
Responsible-Changed-Why:  
Fix "Responsible" field. 


http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=120749 

From: Jille Timmermans <jille@quis.cx>
To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Cc: trasz@freebsd.org, bug-followup@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: kern/120749: [request] Suggest upping the default kern.ps_arg_cache_limit
Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 14:32:03 +0200

 Can't we better start a discussion about this?
 If we deassign it we will be quite sure it will remain there forever.
 
 I don't think it is really usefull as it is already adjustable by `sysctl 
 kern.ps_arg_cache_limit=1024` and nobody really seems to care.
 
 
 -- Jille
 Ps, I have not looked back in the archives whether this was already discussed; 
 as there was no followup and I'm lazy.
 
 Op 17-5-2010 14:12, trasz@freebsd.org schreef:
 > Synopsis: [request] Suggest upping the default kern.ps_arg_cache_limit
 >
 > Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-arch->freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org
 > Responsible-Changed-By: trasz
 > Responsible-Changed-When: Mon May 17 12:11:08 UTC 2010
 > Responsible-Changed-Why:
 > Deassign; mail to arch@ every month is annoying.
 >
 >
 > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=120749
 > _______________________________________________
 > freebsd-arch@freebsd.org mailing list
 > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
 > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"

From: Antony Mawer <lists@mawer.org>
To: Jille Timmermans <jille@quis.cx>
Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org, trasz@freebsd.org, bug-followup@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: kern/120749: [request] Suggest upping the default 
	kern.ps_arg_cache_limit
Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 23:37:30 +1000

 There was some recent comments that suggested this was beneficial with
 various Tomcat/Java applications, which otherwise experienced their
 command lines being truncated in the rc.d script for tomcat. What is
 the trade of increasing this - increased memory usage?
 
 -- Antony
 
 On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 10:32 PM, Jille Timmermans <jille@quis.cx> wrote:
 > Can't we better start a discussion about this?
 > If we deassign it we will be quite sure it will remain there forever.
 >
 > I don't think it is really usefull as it is already adjustable by `sysctl
 > kern.ps_arg_cache_limit=1024` and nobody really seems to care.
 >
 >
 > -- Jille
 > Ps, I have not looked back in the archives whether this was already
 > discussed; as there was no followup and I'm lazy.
 >
 > Op 17-5-2010 14:12, trasz@freebsd.org schreef:
 >>
 >> Synopsis: [request] Suggest upping the default kern.ps_arg_cache_limit
 >>
 >> Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-arch->freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org
 >> Responsible-Changed-By: trasz
 >> Responsible-Changed-When: Mon May 17 12:11:08 UTC 2010
 >> Responsible-Changed-Why:
 >> Deassign; mail to arch@ every month is annoying.
 >>
 >>
 >> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=120749
 >> _______________________________________________
 >> freebsd-arch@freebsd.org mailing list
 >> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
 >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
 >
 > _______________________________________________
 > freebsd-arch@freebsd.org mailing list
 > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
 > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
 >

From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
To: bug-followup@freebsd.org,
 peter.schuller@infidyne.com
Cc:  
Subject: Re: kern/120749: [request] Suggest upping the default kern.ps_arg_cache_limit
Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 10:03:31 -0400

 I don't really think that there is a sufficient reason to change the default, 
 especially since it is very easy to adjust it locally.
 
 -- 
 John Baldwin

From: Peter Schuller <peter.schuller@infidyne.com>
To: Antony Mawer <lists@mawer.org>, jhb@freebsd.org
Cc: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org, bug-followup@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: kern/120749: [request] Suggest upping the default 
	kern.ps_arg_cache_limit
Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 19:31:11 +0200

 > There was some recent comments that suggested this was beneficial with
 > various Tomcat/Java applications, which otherwise experienced their
 > command lines being truncated in the rc.d script for tomcat. What is
 > the trade of increasing this - increased memory usage?
 
 Tomcat/Java stuff is a great example of how many real-life command
 lines are much longer nowadays. As I originally stated, this is why I
 think a (to me, seemingly) more "modern" default is appropriate. Yes,
 it can be changed. But why should one have to, unless there is a clear
 disadvantage? (I do, and it doesn't affect me, but I am thinking of
 other people and new users.)
 
 I would be surprised if "ps auxww | grep X" not yielding output has
 not confused quite a lot of people, not neccessarly even aware that
 there is *a* limit, let alone how to change it.
 
 And as I said originally in the PR submission, I cannot speak to
 whether there are technical reasons other than memory use why this
 cannot be increased. But if the *only* issue is memory use, that seems
 like a complete non-issue to me given that even minimalistic simple C
 programs will typically depend on a stack size significantly larger
 than this. Again, even if the memory is in fact wired, it seems like a
 completely acceptable trade-off to me on any reasonable, modern,
 general-purpose system.
 
 I don't have any personal stake in this since I adjust the sysctl
 appropriately on all installations I manage, but I think this is an
 almost text book example of a seemingly small "detail" that may
 detract from the overall FreeBSD experience for new users in
 particular (and probably not-so-new users too).
 
 -- 
 / Peter Schuller
>Unformatted:
