Re: Where could I upload x32 port bootstrap?
On Sat, 10 Nov 2012, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 02:15:14PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > Yes, I know :) Our amavisd-box at work has 16GiB RAM and 16 cores,
> > we need at least that much to be able to run 64 instances with the
> > scratch directories on tmpfs...
> > x32 would be most likely a _MAJOR_ win for that box.
>
> Is it _likely_ or is it? 16GiB can be used with the 32bit i386 also.
I assume you mean a amd64-kernel with i386 userspace combination.
Compared to x32, i*86 userspace on a 64-bit kernel has the added aggravation
of the full kernel syscall compat layer, which has been a source of problems
in the past, and all the wasted performance of our i486-optimized userland.
Still, the performance should be close enough between the two for many
workloads. We'd have to test it to know.
Note that I am fine with x32 as a partial arch, but it better have all the
pointer-heavy crap in it, such as perl, as well as anything that benefits
greatly from the reduced register pressure, from SSE2 or from reduced
pointer size due to cache footprint.
If it is easier to have x32 as a full unofficial arch at first, and later
decide whether it should be partial or not and what should be included, then
let's go for the full unofficial arch...
--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
Henrique Holschuh
Reply to: