Re: How to PERMANENTLY set semaphores in Linux - Suse Personal Edition 8.2?

Thanks for your responses.

I created a script. The script was made up of commands that worked perfectly at the dot prompt (bash).

#! /bin/sh
# File to set shmmax during boot.

echo "Setting size for /proc/sys/kernel/shmmax"

echo ` expr 2048 \* 1024 \* 1024 ` > /proc/sys/kernel/shmmax

echo "Value for shmmax is now: `cat /proc/sys/kernel/shmmax` "

But when I run this file, it doesn't want to work:

Setting size for /proc/sys/kernel/shmmax : No such file or directoryne 5: /proc/sys/kernel/shmmax Value for shmmax is now: 33554432

This occured in both bash, and sh.

Any ideas?

linuxquestion_at_yahoo.com wrote in message news:<672ceaed.0311130006.36cf8f24_at_posting.google.com>...
> HI all,
>
> I'm using: Linux Suse personal edition 8.2
>
> I am using the dbca with Oracle 9.2. It keeps
> running out of memory with the ora-27123 error.
>
> As the docs said, I did this:
>
> echo `expr 2048 \* 1024 \* 1024` > /proc/sys/kernel/shmmax
>
> cat /proc/sys/kernel/shmmax
> 2147483648
>
> reboot
>
> ---------------
>
> But, then I got the same symptom.
> I checked the file.
>
> cat /proc/sys/kernel/shmmax
> 33554432
>
> So, it didn't keep the value!!!
>
>
> ipcs -l
>
> ------ Shared Memory Limits --------
> max number of segments = 4096
> max seg size (kbytes) = 32768
> max total shared memory (kbytes) = 8388608
> min seg size (bytes) = 1
>
> ------ Semaphore Limits --------
> max number of arrays = 1024
> max semaphores per array = 250
> max semaphores system wide = 256000
> max ops per semop call = 32
> semaphore max value = 32767
>
> ------ Messages: Limits --------
> max queues system wide = 128
> max size of message (bytes) = 8192
> default max size of queue (bytes) = 16384
>
>
> In Solaris, this was easy. Edit the file:
> /etc/system
> and reboot. The values stayed there forever.
>
> But how to do this in Suse, and make it stick?
>
> I don't want to put this in some script, so they
> get changed while booting, and add yet another
> layer of complexity.
>
> Thanks
Received on Fri Nov 14 2003 - 02:53:16 CST