[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       openldap-bugs
Subject:    [Issue 10190] Stack space exhaustion on windows due to FD_SETSIZE
From:       openldap-its () openldap ! org
Date:       2024-03-15 3:23:52
Message-ID: bug-10190-2-xSE3Sp3LTY () http ! bugs ! openldap ! org/
[Download RAW message or body]

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10190

--- Comment #6 from varunpatil@ucla.edu ---
(In reply to Howard Chu from comment #5)
> (In reply to varunpatil from comment #4)
> > >  Patches to change constants that are already redefinable at compile time will not be accepted.
> > 
> > Why though? This seems like a very crappy policy.
> > 
> > This bug took a very long time to diagnose and I've no doubt others might
> > run into it if they bothered to compile for Windows.
> 
> What bug? You haven't identified any bug. OpenLDAP builds and runs fine on
> Windows, and the slapd server handles thousands of concurrent connections,
> same as when built on Linux. There is no bug here.

Did you even bother to read the description? I don't care if your slapd server
handles millions of connections; fact is that a simple app using libldap can
segfault under certain circumstances on Windows, and I consider this a bug.

> Changing the default as you have would cripple slapd built on Windows, and
> would be a significant backward-incompatible change.

You're not even supposed to change FD_SETSIZE, and Linux uses 1024 regardless;
so I wouldn't be so sure about the "crippling" you talk about. Perhaps it might
have made sense to make it consistent to 1024 across platforms; 4096 allocates
64K memory on the stack for a single select call.

> Allowing such changes would really be a crappy policy.

Your ego is leading you to miss the point. Your statement of "Patches to change
constants that are already redefinable at compile time will not be accepted" is
objectively crap. The whole point of having defaults is that they should be
reasonable and so changing a default value is a perfectly valid change. You not
agreeing with a different default and rejecting patches that change defaults
outright are two completely different things.

> This ticket is closed.

Umm okay? As an open source maintainer myself, I'm really liking your attitude
towards people who want to contribute. Honestly I'd close it again if I could
and never (try to) contribute again.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.=
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]