Re: [hendrik@topoi.pooq.com: Is the AMD-64 ready for reliable use? (possibly on K8V-MX moptherboard)]
On Thu, Dec 22, 2005 at 09:34:29AM -0500, hendrik@topoi.pooq.com wrote:
> I'm considering buying a box and putting the AMD64 port of sarge
> on it.
>
> I can see lots of problems with the AMD64 port on the mailing
> list, but that doesn't make it clear whether troubles are normal
> or unusual. Very few happy users ever write in to say how happy
> they are,
>
> I have had it proposed to me that I might set up a server for
> my LAN (not the internet gateway) as a Sempron system running
> Linux. Specifically, an Asus K8V-MX Athlon 64 motherboard,
> an AMD Sempron64 2600, 512 meg DDR PC-3200 w/o ECC.
> to quote from the quotation.
>
> My question is, is the Debian AMD64 platform ready for such use?
> Presumably I'd be using the unofficial sarge release ... or has it
> become official in the meantime? Or is etch actually more reliable right now?
The amd64 distribution for the most part works perfectly. The reason
you see many problems is that amd64 systems are constantly coming out in
new versions, while i386 systems are pretty much history as far as new
systems are concerned. The people with these new amd64 systems have the
same install problems on i386 as they do with amd64 since it is just a
matter of new hardware not being supported fully by the kernel on the
installer.
There are also a few issues with some programs that are sloppily written
or tried to use "clever" optimizations which are not 64bit clean.
Things such as openoffice.org, and a few other programs fall into this
category.
Of course things that require binary only code (win32 codecs for example
for playing back some videos) don't work in 64bit. Those have to run in
a 32bit chroot instead. Not usually a big deal, and if you don't intend
to watch videos without open codecs, then no problem.
Of course you do have the option of just running i386 debian on the
system and it will still be very fast. The majority of programs don't
gain that much performance going 64bit. It is a trade off.
> The server will initially be running an NFS server that serves from a
> software RAID (hard disks presumably partitioned using LVM). I'm
> considering putting everybody's home directory on it so that they will
> have their bookmarks, configurations, etc. available whatever machine
> in the house they are actually sitting at. But if the are running on
> one of the substantially less powerful machines, they will use the
> Sempron remotely using XDMCP or VNC. Oh, yes. One or two of my users
> are collecting video files (mostly .mpg). Would accessing them from
> another machine using NFS (100 MHz ethernet) be fast enough for them to
> view them? Even if two users did it at the same time? (not from the
> legacy 100MHz pentium, though, of course).
100Mbit ethernet should be fine for that, although if you have multiple
users using xdmcp or vnc, then you might want to consider using a switch
with a gigabit port for the server, at least if they do graphics
intensive things. If they don't, well then 100Mbit should be plenty. A
lot of boards come with gigabit ethernet onboard, so the only issue is
whether a switch would have it. Also for multiple xdmcp/vnc users you
really want to have more than 512M ram. 1GB would me a lot better and
cost very little extra.
> Any comments on whether this plan is feasible? Do others have good
> experiences with that motherboard? Or should I backtrack and specify an
> old reliable 32-bit Pentium instead?
Well I use the Asus A8V Deluxe which is essentially the socket 939
version of the board, with some extra features thrown in, and of course
more PCI slots. Works great.
Len Sorensen
Reply to: