Re: [j-nsp] force-64bit

2016-06-02 Thread Chris Adams
Once upon a time, Jesper Skriver said: > The flip side is that all pointers are twice the size, in an application like > rpd I'd expect most of the memory usage to be pointers, so we can expect ~2x > the memory usage. That coupled with memory access typically being the >

Re: [j-nsp] force-64bit

2016-06-02 Thread Jesper Skriver
> On 01 Jun 2016, at 21:29, Vincent Bernat wrote: > > The other benefit would be the ability for rpd to make use of more CPU > registers and to be faster. On average, one could expect a 20% speedup > when recompiling for x86-64. I have absolutely no idea if such number > would

Re: [j-nsp] force-64bit

2016-06-02 Thread raf
Le 02/06/2016 à 00:02, Olivier Benghozi a écrit : This is not completely contradictory with the Juniper doc ; as usual with the Juniper doc written with feet, you have to read between the lines: -> Written in the doc: "Tip: You need not restart the routing protocol process (rpd) to use the

Re: [j-nsp] force-64bit

2016-06-01 Thread Olivier Benghozi
This is not completely contradictory with the Juniper doc ; as usual with the Juniper doc written with feet, you have to read between the lines: -> Written in the doc: "Tip: You need not restart the routing protocol process (rpd) to use the 64-bit mode" -> To be understood: "Joke: You need not

Re: [j-nsp] force-64bit

2016-06-01 Thread Tim Hoffman via juniper-nsp
On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Saku Ytti wrote: > On 1 June 2016 at 20:32, Phil Rosenthal wrote: > > I suspect that there is not that high of a risk of bugs due to this > change, in all likelihood, the only changes required for this was a > different compiler

Re: [j-nsp] force-64bit

2016-06-01 Thread Vincent Bernat
❦ 1 juin 2016 18:22 CEST, Phil Rosenthal  : > Even on systems with many peers, 5+ full tables, and a full IGP mesh, > I haven’t seen rpd much over 1GB of ram in use. 64bit rpd would only > be beneficial if you have a need for a rpd process using more than 4GB > of ram. The

Re: [j-nsp] force-64bit

2016-06-01 Thread Theo Voss
ck.nether.net> Betreff: Re: [j-nsp] force-64bit I’ll ask the obvious question — do you actually have a ‘need’ for this? Even on systems with many peers, 5+ full tables, and a full IGP mesh, I haven’t seen rpd much over 1GB of ram in use. 64bit rpd would only be beneficial if you have a need

Re: [j-nsp] force-64bit

2016-06-01 Thread Saku Ytti
On 1 June 2016 at 20:32, Phil Rosenthal wrote: > I suspect that there is not that high of a risk of bugs due to this change, > in all likelihood, the only changes required for this was a different > compiler and perhaps the use of a few 64 bit instead of 32 bit variables — >

Re: [j-nsp] force-64bit

2016-06-01 Thread Chris Adams
Once upon a time, Phil Rosenthal said: > I suspect that there is not that high of a risk of bugs due to this change, > in all likelihood, the only changes required for this was a different > compiler and perhaps the use of a few 64 bit instead of 32 bit variables — > but even

Re: [j-nsp] force-64bit

2016-06-01 Thread Chris Adams
Once upon a time, Phil Rosenthal said: > Even on systems with many peers, 5+ full tables, and a full IGP mesh, I > haven’t seen rpd much over 1GB of ram in use. 64bit rpd would only be > beneficial if you have a need for a rpd process using more than 4GB of ram. The break

Re: [j-nsp] force-64bit

2016-06-01 Thread Phil Rosenthal
> On Jun 1, 2016, at 10:35 AM, Tim Hoffman wrote: > > 64bit RPD is newer, and by nature will have more bugs - so don't run this > unless you need it. Check this with "show task memory" - this will show what > you have used of the RPD accessible memory. As Phil notes,

Re: [j-nsp] force-64bit

2016-06-01 Thread david.roy
Hello We use it since Junos 14.2. No bug encountered related to this feature. It depends on your sizing. As Tim said check the RPD memory - Just never reach the 80%. David Tim Hoffman via juniper-nsp a écrit 64bit RPD is newer, and by nature will have more bugs - so don't run

Re: [j-nsp] force-64bit

2016-06-01 Thread Tim Hoffman via juniper-nsp
64bit RPD is newer, and by nature will have more bugs - so don't run this unless you need it. Check this with "show task memory" - this will show what you have used of the RPD accessible memory. As Phil notes, you'd need significant RIB scale (which does exist in larger networks) to require

Re: [j-nsp] force-64bit

2016-06-01 Thread Phil Rosenthal
I’ll ask the obvious question — do you actually have a ‘need’ for this? Even on systems with many peers, 5+ full tables, and a full IGP mesh, I haven’t seen rpd much over 1GB of ram in use. 64bit rpd would only be beneficial if you have a need for a rpd process using more than 4GB of ram. Is