Re: 64bit vs i386
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 12:31:40AM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote: > Sure, on the 80486 or early Pentia. But everything since then has > PAE. Perhaps, but as I understand it PAE is basically a segmentation hack (remember overlays in the real 386 days?) which adds a layer of indirection to memory access, and limits the size of memory available to a given process. Whether or not these issues are a *significant* performance issue for a given system is left as a benchmarking exercise for someone who cares more than I do about it. :) For some insight into why PAE is less-optimal, consider: http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/server/PAE/pae_os.mspx Heck, if even Microsoft considers it sub-optimal given their love of sub-optimal OS implementations, you probably should too. :) -- "Oh, look: rocks!" -- Doctor Who, "Destiny of the Daleks" -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 64bit vs i386
Ron Johnson wrote: On 05/13/08 22:15, Todd A. Jacobs wrote: You may also not be able to access all your RAM, Sure, on the 80486 or early Pentia. But everything since then has PAE. The OS will be able to address all your memory, MySQL, for example won't. If you're going to run LAMP, and you don't expect to be run some exotic program that's know to be problematic in a 64bit environment, there is absolutely no reason not to be running 64bit. --kj -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 64bit vs i386
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 01:14:38AM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote: > >>> You may also not be able to access all your RAM, > >> Sure, on the 80486 or early Pentia. But everything since then has PAE. > > > > With a performance hit. :) > > You conveniently snipped the part where I agreed with the RAM > performance hit. Do not credit conspiracy that which can be easily explained by clarification. -- "Police noticed some rustling sounds from Linn's bottom area and on closer inspection a roll of cash was found protruding from Linn's anus, the full amount of cash taken in the robbery." - http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/robber-hides-loot-up-his-booty/2008/05/09/1210131248617.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 64bit vs i386
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 05/14/08 00:37, CaT wrote: > On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 12:31:40AM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote: >> On 05/13/08 22:15, Todd A. Jacobs wrote: >>> On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 09:45:48AM -0700, Abraham Chaffin wrote: >>> wondering if it makes a difference if I install the 64bit version of the debian vs the i386 version of debian? If it's just running apache, >>> You will pay a performance penalty if you run 32-bit on a 64-bit system. >> How so? (That's the polite way of saying, "You're wrong.") > > Less registers for one -> more expensive accessess of variables and Grandparent said "if you run 32-bit on a 64-bit system". And that's just not true. There's only a *benefit* by running 64-bit code, because of the extra registers. If, though, he had said, "performance hit by compiling source code in 32-bit mode versus 64-bit mode", I conditionally agree with you. The problem is that the larger code size would have reduced cache performance, negating some (or all) of the benefits from the extra registers. > other data. How much of a hit that makes depends on the s/w run but I'd > say it's a safe bet that most if not all things will go a tad faster. > >>> You may also not be able to access all your RAM, >> Sure, on the 80486 or early Pentia. But everything since then has PAE. > > With a performance hit. :) You conveniently snipped the part where I agreed with the RAM performance hit. - -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA We want... a Shrubbery!! -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFIKoNOS9HxQb37XmcRAn5BAKCc/QetqH+lUaf/bQqts7sZQTa2UgCeLtv+ /dade9+uTTNt/PfFx1FrHwE= =tx4j -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 64bit vs i386
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 12:31:40AM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote: > On 05/13/08 22:15, Todd A. Jacobs wrote: > > On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 09:45:48AM -0700, Abraham Chaffin wrote: > > > >> wondering if it makes a difference if I install the 64bit version of > >> the debian vs the i386 version of debian? If it's just running apache, > > > > You will pay a performance penalty if you run 32-bit on a 64-bit system. > > How so? (That's the polite way of saying, "You're wrong.") Less registers for one -> more expensive accessess of variables and other data. How much of a hit that makes depends on the s/w run but I'd say it's a safe bet that most if not all things will go a tad faster. > > You may also not be able to access all your RAM, > > Sure, on the 80486 or early Pentia. But everything since then has PAE. With a performance hit. :) -- "Police noticed some rustling sounds from Linn's bottom area and on closer inspection a roll of cash was found protruding from Linn's anus, the full amount of cash taken in the robbery." - http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/robber-hides-loot-up-his-booty/2008/05/09/1210131248617.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 64bit vs i386
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 05/13/08 22:15, Todd A. Jacobs wrote: > On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 09:45:48AM -0700, Abraham Chaffin wrote: > >> wondering if it makes a difference if I install the 64bit version of >> the debian vs the i386 version of debian? If it's just running apache, > > You will pay a performance penalty if you run 32-bit on a 64-bit system. How so? (That's the polite way of saying, "You're wrong.") > You may also not be able to access all your RAM, Sure, on the 80486 or early Pentia. But everything since then has PAE. > or will access it less > efficiently (assuming you're using more than 4GB, of course). That's true. > Most of the downsides of 64-bit are in end-user applications like > browser plugins and such, but you can always run them 32-bit under AMD64 > anyway with the help of ia32-libs and ia32-libs-gtk, or under a 32-bit > chroot. That's also true. You *might* have problems running Java apps in a 32-bit browser under x86-64. Installing both a 32-bit and 64-bit Java seems a pain in the arse. - -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA We want... a Shrubbery!! -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFIKnk8S9HxQb37XmcRAtB3AJ9a4do1OgEPKQaxVJjM59NXpH07jACgqzot iqSh7ignhLASbYzixpLWPmU= =VSsm -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 64bit vs i386
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 09:45:48AM -0700, Abraham Chaffin wrote: > wondering if it makes a difference if I install the 64bit version of > the debian vs the i386 version of debian? If it's just running apache, You will pay a performance penalty if you run 32-bit on a 64-bit system. You may also not be able to access all your RAM, or will access it less efficiently (assuming you're using more than 4GB, of course). Most of the downsides of 64-bit are in end-user applications like browser plugins and such, but you can always run them 32-bit under AMD64 anyway with the help of ia32-libs and ia32-libs-gtk, or under a 32-bit chroot. -- "Oh, look: rocks!" -- Doctor Who, "Destiny of the Daleks" -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 64bit vs i386
Thanks for the reply- > I've got a 64 bit server that will be a standard debian LAMP and > > wondering if it makes a difference if I install the 64bit version of the > > debian vs the i386 version of debian? > > If it's just running apache, perl, and php what are the benefits and > > Where's the database? (Did you simply forget to mention it, or is > this really a LAP - Linux, Apache, PHP - system?) > The (M) MySQL is on a different server - so it is a LAP though php and perl will be making mysql calls > drawbacks of both? > > Yes, but does it "just" have 8GB RAM? Is the database 2TB? Are you > expecting 500 hits per day, or 500 hits/second? > Yea just 8 GB RAM =o The database is a couple gigs I'd guess 10 to 20 hits / second though I'm probably off Anyway, it's 2008. Install amd64 and be done with it... > Sounds like there's not that big of an issue here so I'll take your advice and go with the 64 bit version. Thanks, Abraham > > - -- > Ron Johnson, Jr. > Jefferson LA USA > > We want... a Shrubbery!! > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) > > iD8DBQFIKcnIS9HxQb37XmcRAuSTAKDjUKFAOl8KrT/IefyNSYXG6XlRiACffIzj > 4bq8bNye45Pw42BgCKJjqJE= > =3W97 > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
Re: 64bit vs i386
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 05/13/08 11:45, Abraham Chaffin wrote: > I've got a 64 bit server that will be a standard debian LAMP and > wondering if it makes a difference if I install the 64bit version of the > debian vs the i386 version of debian? > If it's just running apache, perl, and php what are the benefits and Where's the database? (Did you simply forget to mention it, or is this really a LAP - Linux, Apache, PHP - system?) > drawbacks of both? Yes, but does it "just" have 8GB RAM? Is the database 2TB? Are you expecting 500 hits per day, or 500 hits/second? Anyway, it's 2008. Install amd64 and be done with it... - -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA We want... a Shrubbery!! -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFIKcnIS9HxQb37XmcRAuSTAKDjUKFAOl8KrT/IefyNSYXG6XlRiACffIzj 4bq8bNye45Pw42BgCKJjqJE= =3W97 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
