Re: partman-zfs warning template wording
2011/2/8 Christian PERRIER <bubulle@debian.org>:
> Hello Robert (CC'ed to get attention...of course no need to CC me back
> in answers),
Hi Christian,
> If I understand well, partman-zfs is unstable on kfreebsd-i386 but
> fine on kfreebsd-amd64. However, would it be a problem to talk about
> "32 bits systems" and "64 bits systems" instead of "i386" and "amd64"?
This is a common missconception. ZFS has stability and performance
problems on Intel 386 due to limitations of this architecture, it's not
because of word length. I386 carries on with 30 years of ill design
decisions and legacy baggage. Other 32-bit architectures such as
ARM or MIPS don't suffer from this kind of issues.
Specifically, the problems have to do with small number of
general-purpose registers and with inability to implement
privilege separation at the MMU level.
> These arches names are confusing enough, imho.
What's confusing about them?
--
Robert Millan
Reply to: