Re: debian_amd64_sarge
i dont think anyone would say that the amd64 port is horendously unstable.
as a server, most of your standard software is 64bit friendly
and 64bit is by no means new ground for the linux kernel.
for example, you shouldnt see any 64bit specific issues from...
apache.
mysql.
postgresql.
perl.
exim.
postfix.
qmail.
bind.
samba.
proftpd.
(and friends)
as they are all diversly ported
you may have issues with binary or really obscure software.
that said, 32bit chroot is really good.
the kernel was ported to amd64 late in the 2.4 series and my understanding
at this point is mainly hardware and driver issues. there have been leaps
and bounds in this area.
for what its worth, i wouldnt hesitate to deploy debian sarge (with a
newer kernel) on production servers.
Dean
On Sat, June 3, 2006 12:44 am, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 02, 2006 at 04:33:21PM +0200, Kompar Krisztian wrote:
>> Yes, I have read it that I can use maximum 64Gb memory using PAE. But
>> lot of
>> people wrote that 10-15% CPU time need for this. Is it true? Uptime
>> is very critical :) that is why I didn't try it, yet.
>
> PAE is slower than direct memory access for sure, but I am not sure if
> it is higher overhead than what supposedly some 64bit code slows down on
> 64bit. Certainly for now the 32bit is the mature platform, while the
> 64bit is new.
>
> Life will be much simpler when Etch is released, since then we can
> probably consider amd64 a mature platform too, and hopefully by then
> intel will have released some decent CPUs with 64bit support. :)
>
> Len Sorensen
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-amd64-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
> listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
>
Reply to: