It has a per process thread limit which you cannot change. The limit is
just over 2 thousand I believe. Ran into this with Oracle on NT (they
haven't changed the limit) where a dedicated server process spawns a thread.
So you were limited to about 1500 concurrent users on the machine(each user
gets a thread). (Yes, using MTS - Oracle's multi-threaded service - would
have solved the thread limit.) It is a hard limit. So you are right you
probably can theoretically have 1,000 or more processes on NT et al, but any
given process can only spawn a limited number of threads.
Jim
--
Replace part of the email address: kennedy-down_with_spammers_at_attbi.com
with family. Remove the negative part, keep the minus sign. You can figure
it out.
"Simon Cooke" <simoncooke_at_earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:6KNZ9.2269$wd2.177954_at_newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> Sinister Midget <xunil_at_kc-rr.com> scribbled:
> > M$ does it, it's somebody else's fault and/or how could the actual
> > users possibly know they should apply the patches that $EMPLOYER
> > releases?
> >
> > Only one standard there. MICROS~1 isn't to blame no matter what.
>
> Sounds most of the posters here in reverse - you know; you all claim
> that Microsoft is to blame no matter what, and then make up lies about
> how (for example) Windows can't handle 1000 simultaneous processes.
>
> Simon
>
>
Received on Wed Jan 29 2003 - 10:02:45 CST
