[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: How does one adjust the "maximum number of clients reached" using GTK libraries?



On 09/09/11 12:46, Camaleón wrote:
On Thu, 08 Sep 2011 20:50:01 +0100, AG wrote:

Today during a period when I had a number of various application windows
open in Gnome on Debian stable (LibO, Iceweasel with about 6 tabs,
acroread with 3 tabs, and Korganizer) I attempted to open an image using
Geeqie.  This failed.  Using a terminal window I tried to open Geeqie
again on the command line and this yielded a message (to the effect of)
"maximum number of clients reached" and something about GTk.

However, after closing a window I could then use Geeqie.  This is really
strange - my system is running 2.84Gb of RAM, and 2.8 Gb of swap so it
surely cannot be a memory issue.  But I don't know what it is.  The
current uptime just over 10 days.

Any ideas on what this is about would be gratefully received.
Hum... never happened before :-?

Google has some hints for you:

http://www.google.com/webhp?complete=0&hl=en#sclient=psy-ab&hl=en&complete=0&site=webhp&source=hp&q=maximum+number+of+clients+reached&btnK=Google+Search&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=3e82efc6cc141df0&biw=1280&bih=888

Greetings,


These seem to suggest people using Google Chrome and/ or Firefox with "lastpass" installed are affected, as are those running 64 bit systems. None of these conditions apply to me though.

Someone reported the problem in Slackware and the jury still seems out regarding whether XOrg is the culprit or KDE opening too many sockets. Never having had this before, my only correlation - and only a correlation! - is I recently installed KOrganizer and AbiWord. Certainly it seems like a reasonable number of people have experienced the issue (dating back to ~2005), but there are no definitive solutions.

I guess that I will have to wait and see if once the machine has a comparable uptime (~10 days) see how many sockets are open and which processes can be killed if they are "zombies".

Cheers

AG


Reply to: