Peter Tribble wrote: > If you have an x64 system then running in 64-bit is clearly the > right choice, so isaexec would work fine and would probably > be the right choice there. > > It might be useful to do a comparison on sparc. But my general > experience there is that 64-bit isn't generally better and is only > usually worth it if you need the extra addressability. > >
My concern, in this particular case, wasn't so much with the performance of the binaries (though that is certainly important!), but rather with what would yield the most working configurations OOB. These days, PHP, Apache, Perl, Ruby and Python all assume there is a compiler laying around that is compatible with the rest of the system for building extensions. At least a couple of the above leave build flags hanging out in configuration files, so when you "gem" or "pecl" or "apxs" something, they'll make an attempt to build/integrate it for you. Some of these extensions may not be 64-bit clean. A lot of this stuff has been cleaned up in the past three-to-four years (as 64-bit became more the norm), but I'm sure not all of it has. I don't know how much though. What would concern me is the guy evaluating OpenSolaris, grabbing an extension that's needed for his application, running gem/apxs/phpize/pecl and then seeing it blow up. The install readme won't likely have an "if you're on OpenSolaris" branch, and it may not even be clear where the problem is. The quick conclusion someone could come to in that case is that Web Stack is broken... not what we want. - Matt -- Matt Ingenthron - Web Infrastructure Solutions Architect Sun Microsystems, Inc. - Global Systems Practice http://blogs.sun.com/mingenthron/ email: matt.ingenthron at sun.com Phone: 310-242-6439
