From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 18 17:29:45 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB91B16A400 for ; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 17:29:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from turgeon.martin@gmail.com) Received: from wx-out-0506.google.com (wx-out-0506.google.com [66.249.82.228]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7ACE913C45B for ; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 17:29:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from turgeon.martin@gmail.com) Received: by wx-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id h28so1361718wxd for ; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 10:29:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=Rsy0MHjCP8jQSCT7ZPUEb/agKlbHLaoClU5j+MdS/zunV3d+KcqKlqIeaq3anDj40tr5QiuvRzvPXHOLBaic23W9JhYI24v0T/p3egwrtyyhw66mP7GAQUn40FHYsXbK9qz0af/vcS8lt+f8vl6Yd3DO2WWOtjCquPWoIVZhiGk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=STO3Si5fHnOFT/4GRTtDMckP4q/R87Nyry9GokyvBQmBYhgxx9QWmBov+BKlTYATaZm2Sm4Mkh2I5cFfzCBLR2RkMQYBzpR+jKIrhhzz0PuSFuX3zqGJ0E9BG9KAegWZcK2bsKFYkipH+ocWW6cHKU5k78AnrakJjyMGhqnggaI= Received: by 10.90.27.13 with SMTP id a13mr4033039aga.1182186226500; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 10:03:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?31.33.7.200? ( [74.15.176.82]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 33sm1583495wra.2007.06.18.10.03.45 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 18 Jun 2007 10:03:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4676BAF0.4030703@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 13:03:44 -0400 From: Martin Turgeon User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.4 (Windows/20070604) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Subject: i386 with PAE or AMD64 on PowerEdge with 4G RAM X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 17:29:45 -0000 Good afternoon, I just receive 2 PowerEdge servers (a 1950 and a 860) both with 4G of RAM. I installed FreeBSD 6.2 Release i386 on both of them. Unfortunately, only 3,5G is recognized on the 860 and 3,3G on the 1950. dmesg on 860: real memory = 3757834240 (3583 MB) avail memory = 3678318592 (3507 MB) I am facing a difficult decision. Should I use i386 with PAE enabled in the kernel (I read a lot of warnings using it) or should I go with AMD64? Which branch should I follow? These servers will be front-end/back-end MySQL(with replication) and Apache servers with BIND, Postfix, Dovecot, PF. There is the detailled configuration of the servers: PowerEdge 1950 Xeon 5110 4G RAM PERC 5 Raid controller (mfi) Dual Broadcom 5708 (bce) PowerEdge 860 Xeon 3070 4G RAM LSI Logic Raid controller (mpt) Dual Broadcom 5750 (bge) Thanks a lot for your advice, Martin From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 18 18:19:32 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79D2D16A41F for ; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 18:19:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jdc@parodius.com) Received: from mx01.sc1.parodius.com (mx01.sc1.parodius.com [72.20.106.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A59A13C45E for ; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 18:19:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jdc@parodius.com) Received: by mx01.sc1.parodius.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A1E4C1CC044; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 11:08:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 11:08:13 -0700 From: Jeremy Chadwick To: Martin Turgeon Message-ID: <20070618180813.GA13003@eos.sc1.parodius.com> References: <4676BAF0.4030703@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4676BAF0.4030703@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15 (2007-04-06) Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: i386 with PAE or AMD64 on PowerEdge with 4G RAM X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 18:19:32 -0000 On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 01:03:44PM -0400, Martin Turgeon wrote: > I just receive 2 PowerEdge servers (a 1950 and a 860) both with 4G of RAM. I > installed FreeBSD 6.2 Release i386 on both of them. Unfortunately, only 3,5G > is recognized on the 860 and 3,3G on the 1950. > dmesg on 860: > real memory = 3757834240 (3583 MB) > avail memory = 3678318592 (3507 MB) > > I am facing a difficult decision. Should I use i386 with PAE enabled in the > kernel (I read a lot of warnings using it) or should I go with AMD64? Which > branch should I follow? Based on what I've read from some of the porters and miscellaneous others, generally-speaking there's too many issues with amd64 (in the sense of 32-bit vs. 64-bit compatibility -- not the fault of the kernel or otherwise) to consider it worth switching to. I personally don't run 64-bit OSes because most developers still use 32-bit machines and don't have a way to develop/test in 64-bit environments. That said, I'd recommend you stick with i386 + PAE, simply for guaranteed application compatibility. You'll lose the amount of RAM you're seeing due to PAE addressing for PCI address space. I can dig you up a usage map (broken down by how much is taken up by each portion; PCI, ACPI, etc.) if you want one. It's for SuperMicro systems, but the general idea applies to most everything. -- | Jeremy Chadwick jdc at parodius.com | | Parodius Networking http://www.parodius.com/ | | UNIX Systems Administrator Mountain View, CA, USA | | Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP: 4BD6C0CB | From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 18 19:04:37 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D7F216A46D for ; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 19:04:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mwm-dated-1183055759.84a79d@mired.org) Received: from mired.org (vpn.mired.org [66.92.153.74]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B5E2813C43E for ; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 19:04:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mwm-dated-1183055759.84a79d@mired.org) Received: (qmail 44561 invoked by uid 1001); 18 Jun 2007 18:36:00 -0000 Received: by bhuda.mired.org (tmda-sendmail, from uid 1001); Mon, 18 Jun 2007 14:35:59 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <18038.53391.265513.66864@bhuda.mired.org> Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 14:35:59 -0400 To: Jeremy Chadwick In-Reply-To: <20070618180813.GA13003@eos.sc1.parodius.com> References: <4676BAF0.4030703@gmail.com> <20070618180813.GA13003@eos.sc1.parodius.com> X-Mailer: VM 7.19 under Emacs 21.3.1 X-Primary-Address: mwm@mired.org X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,&SiLvbbz2W`; h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ X-Delivery-Agent: TMDA/1.1.11 (Ladyburn) From: Mike Meyer Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Martin Turgeon , freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: i386 with PAE or AMD64 on PowerEdge with 4G RAM X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 19:04:37 -0000 In <20070618180813.GA13003@eos.sc1.parodius.com>, Jeremy Chadwick typed: > On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 01:03:44PM -0400, Martin Turgeon wrote: > > I just receive 2 PowerEdge servers (a 1950 and a 860) both with 4G of RAM. I > > installed FreeBSD 6.2 Release i386 on both of them. Unfortunately, only 3,5G > > is recognized on the 860 and 3,3G on the 1950. > > dmesg on 860: > > real memory = 3757834240 (3583 MB) > > avail memory = 3678318592 (3507 MB) > > > > I am facing a difficult decision. Should I use i386 with PAE enabled in the > > kernel (I read a lot of warnings using it) or should I go with AMD64? Which > > branch should I follow? > > Based on what I've read from some of the porters and miscellaneous > others, generally-speaking there's too many issues with amd64 (in the > sense of 32-bit vs. 64-bit compatibility -- not the fault of the kernel > or otherwise) to consider it worth switching to. If you need to run 32-bit apps on amd64 FreeBSD, you're pretty much SOL at this point. You'll have to build the the infrastructure to install your apps by hand. On the other hand, 64-bit FreeBSD is fairly solid, and most of the apps I need run as well on amd64 FreeBSD as they do on i386 FreeBSD. My last major project - the ETL code for the world largest linux-based Oracle database with 7x24 availability - has been running on x86_64 linux since day 1, over two years ago. With the exclusion of oracle, it's built entirely on FOSS apps or custom code. > I personally don't run 64-bit OSes because most developers still use > 32-bit machines and don't have a way to develop/test in 64-bit > environments. I find that extremely ironic. I've spent most of the last two days trying to put together a Linux system with python 2.5 (or later) and lxml 1.2 (or later), because I need to add an oracle library to it. While both FreeBSD and darwin ports (where I do development) have all the appropriate bits except oracle, the Linux distros don't have any of them in their packaging systems. The precompiled versions of lxml available are either 64-bit Linux or 32-bit Windows. Unfortunately, I have to have the 32-bit version since the linux dev box is running on VM software that won't run 64-bit code. > That said, I'd recommend you stick with i386 + PAE, simply for > guaranteed application compatibility. If you are going to be using standard protocols to communicate over the network, then the issue isn't compatability so much as availability - the apps you need may not be available for amd64, or may not work reliably if they are. On the other hand, something that nobody ever seems to point out is that the same CPU is noticably faster running amd64 code than i386 code. Probably has something to do with the amd64 mode having twice as many registers. If performance is an issue, it might be worth your while to see if your critical applications are available for the amd64. http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information. From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 18 19:05:41 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A83316A41F; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 19:05:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: from mail.soaustin.net (mail.soaustin.net [207.200.4.66]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7ACD513C468; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 19:05:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id AB7B0E86; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 13:48:02 -0500 (CDT) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 13:48:02 -0500 To: Mike Meyer Message-ID: <20070618184802.GC30616@soaustin.net> References: <4676BAF0.4030703@gmail.com> <20070618180813.GA13003@eos.sc1.parodius.com> <18038.53391.265513.66864@bhuda.mired.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <18038.53391.265513.66864@bhuda.mired.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i From: linimon@lonesome.com (Mark Linimon) Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Jeremy Chadwick , Martin Turgeon , freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: i386 with PAE or AMD64 on PowerEdge with 4G RAM X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 19:05:41 -0000 On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 02:35:59PM -0400, Mike Meyer wrote: > While both FreeBSD and darwin ports (where I do development) have all > the appropriate bits except oracle, the Linux distros don't have any > of them in their packaging systems. It might be nice to point that out to Oracle, as a way to try to sell FreeBSD as a platform. mcl From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 18 19:56:11 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FF9216A400 for ; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 19:56:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mwm-dated-1183058851.df4cd8@mired.org) Received: from mired.org (vpn.mired.org [66.92.153.74]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A173813C487 for ; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 19:56:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mwm-dated-1183058851.df4cd8@mired.org) Received: (qmail 45490 invoked by uid 1001); 18 Jun 2007 19:27:31 -0000 Received: by bhuda.mired.org (tmda-sendmail, from uid 1001); Mon, 18 Jun 2007 15:27:30 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <18038.56482.533559.427256@bhuda.mired.org> Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 15:27:30 -0400 To: linimon@lonesome.com (Mark Linimon) In-Reply-To: <20070618184802.GC30616@soaustin.net> References: <4676BAF0.4030703@gmail.com> <20070618180813.GA13003@eos.sc1.parodius.com> <18038.53391.265513.66864@bhuda.mired.org> <20070618184802.GC30616@soaustin.net> X-Mailer: VM 7.19 under Emacs 21.3.1 X-Primary-Address: mwm@mired.org X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,&SiLvbbz2W`; h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ X-Delivery-Agent: TMDA/1.1.11 (Ladyburn) From: Mike Meyer Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Jeremy Chadwick , Martin Turgeon , freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: i386 with PAE or AMD64 on PowerEdge with 4G RAM X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 19:56:11 -0000 In <20070618184802.GC30616@soaustin.net>, Mark Linimon typed: > On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 02:35:59PM -0400, Mike Meyer wrote: > > While both FreeBSD and darwin ports (where I do development) have all > > the appropriate bits except oracle, the Linux distros don't have any > > of them in their packaging systems. > It might be nice to point that out to Oracle, as a way to try to sell > FreeBSD as a platform. I've started looking for a contact.... Thanks, http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information. From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 18 21:15:32 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38B5B16A421 for ; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 21:15:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from turgeon.martin@gmail.com) Received: from an-out-0708.google.com (an-out-0708.google.com [209.85.132.251]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E73AF13C448 for ; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 21:15:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from turgeon.martin@gmail.com) Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id c14so419378anc for ; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 14:15:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=NkhkN3+KM0Bn4yWV8IJwK24atluGJFdKFhpL3XL2MqI/JjWIV3o+NdN+UgxoCEcvwaLbZaeaI75Y83X5gaXBOG24Sg++YKqfKqQd+ETVfmffywiwR1GqkPIhhjQtyiUgRRyuFfmmj1dc2i5DJCALNZ5lcx7tvpeaTfFGs7SSeE0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=pC9Y2HB+hz6RA6qK4HZlIY8JckMR/ph2kF6jbtjobZkGRVh6xnDp9rw8+qUByfnFWwdryLmjj7ie6qBaZtpB488bwcyGEuuhojkN9kA4U+V/4k8quwMj5+ojrluSy++9mCXiAovK1rKOBCPKymvEp6AANcl4I5IdvOKxlgYjsWA= Received: by 10.100.173.19 with SMTP id v19mr1458917ane.1182201330970; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 14:15:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.100.41.16 with HTTP; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 14:15:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <322073cc0706181415o17ecd532i971d8bdf5ea1dafd@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 17:15:30 -0400 From: "Martin Turgeon" To: "Jeremy Chadwick" In-Reply-To: <20070618180813.GA13003@eos.sc1.parodius.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4676BAF0.4030703@gmail.com> <20070618180813.GA13003@eos.sc1.parodius.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: i386 with PAE or AMD64 on PowerEdge with 4G RAM X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 21:15:32 -0000 2007/6/18, Jeremy Chadwick : > > On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 01:03:44PM -0400, Martin Turgeon wrote: > > I just receive 2 PowerEdge servers (a 1950 and a 860) both with 4G of > RAM. I > > installed FreeBSD 6.2 Release i386 on both of them. Unfortunately, only > 3,5G > > is recognized on the 860 and 3,3G on the 1950. > > dmesg on 860: > > real memory = 3757834240 (3583 MB) > > avail memory = 3678318592 (3507 MB) > > > > I am facing a difficult decision. Should I use i386 with PAE enabled in > the > > kernel (I read a lot of warnings using it) or should I go with AMD64? > Which > > branch should I follow? > > Based on what I've read from some of the porters and miscellaneous > others, generally-speaking there's too many issues with amd64 (in the > sense of 32-bit vs. 64-bit compatibility -- not the fault of the kernel > or otherwise) to consider it worth switching to. > > I personally don't run 64-bit OSes because most developers still use > 32-bit machines and don't have a way to develop/test in 64-bit > environments. > > That said, I'd recommend you stick with i386 + PAE, simply for > guaranteed application compatibility. My setup is fairly standard (as I described), should I expect problem with 64 bit version of these programs? You'll lose the amount of RAM you're seeing due to PAE addressing for > PCI address space. I can dig you up a usage map (broken down by how > much is taken up by each portion; PCI, ACPI, etc.) if you want one. > It's for SuperMicro systems, but the general idea applies to most > everything. I'm not sure to understand what you mean by that. Are you saying that PAE will eat the 500M that should be available? -- > | Jeremy Chadwick jdc at parodius.com | > | Parodius Networking http://www.parodius.com/ | > | UNIX Systems Administrator Mountain View, CA, USA | > | Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP: 4BD6C0CB | > > From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 18 21:18:51 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 320FC16A469; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 21:18:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DA6213C484; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 21:18:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C03961A4D80; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 14:18:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rot13.obsecurity.org (rot13.obsecurity.org [192.168.1.5]) by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67209512C2; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 17:18:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: by rot13.obsecurity.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 0B909BED8; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 17:18:50 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 17:18:49 -0400 From: Kris Kennaway To: Martin Turgeon Message-ID: <20070618211849.GA77265@rot13.obsecurity.org> References: <4676BAF0.4030703@gmail.com> <20070618180813.GA13003@eos.sc1.parodius.com> <322073cc0706181415o17ecd532i971d8bdf5ea1dafd@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <322073cc0706181415o17ecd532i971d8bdf5ea1dafd@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Jeremy Chadwick , freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: i386 with PAE or AMD64 on PowerEdge with 4G RAM X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 21:18:51 -0000 On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 05:15:30PM -0400, Martin Turgeon wrote: > 2007/6/18, Jeremy Chadwick : > > > >On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 01:03:44PM -0400, Martin Turgeon wrote: > >> I just receive 2 PowerEdge servers (a 1950 and a 860) both with 4G of > >RAM. I > >> installed FreeBSD 6.2 Release i386 on both of them. Unfortunately, only > >3,5G > >> is recognized on the 860 and 3,3G on the 1950. > >> dmesg on 860: > >> real memory = 3757834240 (3583 MB) > >> avail memory = 3678318592 (3507 MB) > >> > >> I am facing a difficult decision. Should I use i386 with PAE enabled in > >the > >> kernel (I read a lot of warnings using it) or should I go with AMD64? > >Which > >> branch should I follow? > > > >Based on what I've read from some of the porters and miscellaneous > >others, generally-speaking there's too many issues with amd64 (in the > >sense of 32-bit vs. 64-bit compatibility -- not the fault of the kernel > >or otherwise) to consider it worth switching to. > > > >I personally don't run 64-bit OSes because most developers still use > >32-bit machines and don't have a way to develop/test in 64-bit > >environments. > > > >That said, I'd recommend you stick with i386 + PAE, simply for > >guaranteed application compatibility. > > > My setup is fairly standard (as I described), should I expect problem with > 64 bit version of these programs? No. I'd go with amd64 personally. Kris From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 18 22:10:23 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BEC516A469; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 22:10:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jdc@parodius.com) Received: from mx01.sc1.parodius.com (mx01.sc1.parodius.com [72.20.106.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE7A613C458; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 22:10:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jdc@parodius.com) Received: by mx01.sc1.parodius.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id D60CD1CC044; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 15:10:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 15:10:22 -0700 From: Jeremy Chadwick To: Martin Turgeon Message-ID: <20070618221022.GA17952@eos.sc1.parodius.com> References: <4676BAF0.4030703@gmail.com> <20070618180813.GA13003@eos.sc1.parodius.com> <322073cc0706181415o17ecd532i971d8bdf5ea1dafd@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <322073cc0706181415o17ecd532i971d8bdf5ea1dafd@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15 (2007-04-06) Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: i386 with PAE or AMD64 on PowerEdge with 4G RAM X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 22:10:23 -0000 On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 05:15:30PM -0400, Martin Turgeon wrote: > My setup is fairly standard (as I described), should I expect problem with > 64 bit version of these programs? Like I said, I don't run 64-bit OSes because I prefer compatibility. Believe me, the instant you run into some quirky problem with either the kernel or any of its subsystems, or a third-party program (from ports or otherwise), the first thing you'll be told is "it works for me on i386, have you tried i386?" I'm sorry if this sounds condescending or combative, but it's what I continually see on other lists. > You'll lose the amount of RAM you're seeing due to PAE addressing for > > PCI address space. I can dig you up a usage map (broken down by how > > much is taken up by each portion; PCI, ACPI, etc.) if you want one. > > It's for SuperMicro systems, but the general idea applies to most > > everything. > > I'm not sure to understand what you mean by that. Are you saying that PAE > will eat the 500M that should be available? PCI addressing is actually responsible for most of it, but it's worse when PAE is in use. This is one of the many reasons a lot of people prefer to run in 64-bit environments. Taken from a Supermicro motherboard manual, documenting the issue (seems their math may be off by 2MB ;) ): http://www.supermicro.com/manuals/motherboard/3000/MNL-0889.pdf 4. Due to memory allocation to system devices, memory remaining available for operational use will be reduced when 4 GB of RAM is used. The reduction in memory availability is disproportional. (Refer to the following Memory Availability Table for details.) System Device Size Physical Memory Remaining (-Available) (4GB Total System Memory) =================================================================== Firmware Hub flash memory 1MB 3.99GB (System BIOS) Local APIC 4KB 3.99GB Area Reserved for chipset 2MB 3.99GB I/O APIC (4 Kbytes) 4KB 3.99GB PCI Enumeration Area 1 256MB 3.76GB PCI Express (256 MB) 256MB 3.51GB PCI Enumeration Area 2 512MB 3.01GB (if needed) -Aligned on 256-MB boundary- VGA Memory 16MB 2.85GB TSEG 1MB 2.84GB ------------------------------------------------------------------- Memory available to OS and 2.84GB other applications =================================================================== -- | Jeremy Chadwick jdc at parodius.com | | Parodius Networking http://www.parodius.com/ | | UNIX Systems Administrator Mountain View, CA, USA | | Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP: 4BD6C0CB | From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 18 23:38:59 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 963A516A468; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 23:38:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E34313C46C; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 23:38:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB2691A4D80; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 16:38:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rot13.obsecurity.org (rot13.obsecurity.org [192.168.1.5]) by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C71D3513C6; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 19:38:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: by rot13.obsecurity.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id B6E1CC296; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 19:38:58 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 19:38:58 -0400 From: Kris Kennaway To: Jeremy Chadwick Message-ID: <20070618233858.GA79358@rot13.obsecurity.org> References: <4676BAF0.4030703@gmail.com> <20070618180813.GA13003@eos.sc1.parodius.com> <322073cc0706181415o17ecd532i971d8bdf5ea1dafd@mail.gmail.com> <20070618221022.GA17952@eos.sc1.parodius.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="OXfL5xGRrasGEqWY" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070618221022.GA17952@eos.sc1.parodius.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Martin Turgeon , freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: i386 with PAE or AMD64 on PowerEdge with 4G RAM X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 23:38:59 -0000 --OXfL5xGRrasGEqWY Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 03:10:22PM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: > On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 05:15:30PM -0400, Martin Turgeon wrote: > > My setup is fairly standard (as I described), should I expect problem = with > > 64 bit version of these programs? >=20 > Like I said, I don't run 64-bit OSes because I prefer compatibility. > Believe me, the instant you run into some quirky problem with either the > kernel or any of its subsystems, or a third-party program (from ports or > otherwise), the first thing you'll be told is "it works for me on i386, > have you tried i386?" I think this assertion is false. amd64 is pretty well supported and run by an increasing number of users and developers. Kris --OXfL5xGRrasGEqWY Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFGdxeSWry0BWjoQKURAuPaAJ4i3CHo8B+/VqQp6QcknYwDvZME+wCghpWJ 9fJHKwGaNxPp/Ax33no/Eq4= =Nc/2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --OXfL5xGRrasGEqWY-- From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 19 00:03:15 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1268016A47D for ; Tue, 19 Jun 2007 00:03:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mwm-dated-1183073639.7c134b@mired.org) Received: from mired.org (vpn.mired.org [66.92.153.74]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BE3FB13C4B0 for ; Tue, 19 Jun 2007 00:02:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mwm-dated-1183073639.7c134b@mired.org) Received: (qmail 54174 invoked by uid 1001); 18 Jun 2007 23:33:59 -0000 Received: by bhuda.mired.org (tmda-sendmail, from uid 1001); Mon, 18 Jun 2007 19:33:59 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <18039.5734.791879.856475@bhuda.mired.org> Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 19:33:58 -0400 To: Jeremy Chadwick In-Reply-To: <20070618221022.GA17952@eos.sc1.parodius.com> References: <4676BAF0.4030703@gmail.com> <20070618180813.GA13003@eos.sc1.parodius.com> <322073cc0706181415o17ecd532i971d8bdf5ea1dafd@mail.gmail.com> <20070618221022.GA17952@eos.sc1.parodius.com> X-Mailer: VM 7.19 under Emacs 21.3.1 X-Primary-Address: mwm@mired.org X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,&SiLvbbz2W`; h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ X-Delivery-Agent: TMDA/1.1.11 (Ladyburn) From: Mike Meyer Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Martin Turgeon , freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: i386 with PAE or AMD64 on PowerEdge with 4G RAM X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 00:03:15 -0000 In <20070618221022.GA17952@eos.sc1.parodius.com>, Jeremy Chadwick typed: > On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 05:15:30PM -0400, Martin Turgeon wrote: > > My setup is fairly standard (as I described), should I expect problem with > > 64 bit version of these programs? > Like I said, I don't run 64-bit OSes because I prefer compatibility. So you have no first-hand experience with support for 64-bit OSes. > Believe me, the instant you run into some quirky problem with either the > kernel or any of its subsystems, or a third-party program (from ports or > otherwise), the first thing you'll be told is "it works for me on i386, > have you tried i386?" > I'm sorry if this sounds condescending or combative, but it's what I > continually see on other lists. I don't mean to sound condescending either, but I continually see "it works for me on " on other lists as well. Linux vs. FreeBSD, 64 vs. 32 bits, LOCALBASE being something other than /usr/local, etc. People trying to help try what you say doesn't work. If it works for them, they'll latch on to whatever is the most obvious thing that's different between your two systems as the most likely cause. Sometimes they may be right, but not always. I've found support for 64 bit FreeBSD and the applications in the ports tree to be nearly indistinguishable from 32 bit FreeBSD. The developers are either responsive, and things will get fixed (or are already fixed, and you need to update your sources), or they aren't responsive, and you'll be stuck trying to fix it yourself. If the developer is responsive and you are reasonably capable and willing to do some work yourself, whether or not the developer has a 64 bit box simply isn't an issue. If the developer isn't responsive, whether you're running on 32 or 64 bit hardware isn't an issue either. For applications, there have been 64 bit Unix boxes around for a long time. Especially servers. Anything that's in serious use almost certainly had all the 32 vs. 64 bit issues shaken out long ago. Yeah, some things are probably so 32-bit dependent they'll never be fixed (the X server code in tightvnc comes to mind), but there are usually alternative solutions available. Some things are proprietary, and aren't available (like Windows codecs). The only way to figure out where your applications fit on the list is to try them and see. http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information. From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 19 00:24:12 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9EF716A421 for ; Tue, 19 Jun 2007 00:24:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from janm@transactionware.com) Received: from mail.transactionware.com (mail.transactionware.com [203.14.245.7]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E925D13C455 for ; Tue, 19 Jun 2007 00:24:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from janm@transactionware.com) Received: (qmail 80188 invoked from network); 18 Jun 2007 23:57:48 -0000 Received: from midgard.transactionware.com (192.168.1.55) by dm.transactionware.com with SMTP; 18 Jun 2007 23:57:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 50308 invoked by uid 907); 18 Jun 2007 23:57:28 -0000 Received: from midgard.transactionware.com (HELO IBMA618C20271E) (192.168.1.55) by midgard.transactionware.com (qpsmtpd/0.32) with ESMTP; Tue, 19 Jun 2007 09:57:28 +1000 From: "Jan Mikkelsen" To: "'Martin Turgeon'" , , Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 09:57:23 +1000 Message-ID: <002101c7b204$6ad29f30$0502a8c0@IBMA618C20271E> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6822 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 In-Reply-To: <4676BAF0.4030703@gmail.com> Thread-Index: AcexzyA00oaD5kRVSBuEdNc89ylpoAANGt+w Importance: Normal Cc: Subject: RE: i386 with PAE or AMD64 on PowerEdge with 4G RAM X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 00:24:12 -0000 Martin Turgeon wrote: > ... > I am facing a difficult decision. Should I use i386 with PAE > enabled in > the kernel (I read a lot of warnings using it) or should I go with > AMD64? Which branch should I follow? > > These servers will be front-end/back-end MySQL(with replication) and > Apache servers with BIND, Postfix, Dovecot, PF. Looks like an easy decision to me. You have source for all of those things, and they are known to work on amd64. I suggest going amd64. There are many advantages in going amd64, and the primary disadvantage of going amd64 is the inability to run some (but not all) 32-bit binaries at the moment. I see no 32-bit binaries in your list. Regards, Jan Mikkelsen. From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 19 00:37:55 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A678C16A41F; Tue, 19 Jun 2007 00:37:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mjacob@freebsd.org) Received: from ns1.feral.com (ns1.feral.com [192.67.166.1]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8062113C487; Tue, 19 Jun 2007 00:37:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mjacob@freebsd.org) Received: from ns1.feral.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ns1.feral.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l5J0blM2036465; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 17:37:55 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mjacob@freebsd.org) Received: from localhost (mjacob@localhost) by ns1.feral.com (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) with ESMTP id l5J0bksu036462; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 17:37:47 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mjacob@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: ns1.feral.com: mjacob owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 17:37:46 -0700 (PDT) From: mjacob@freebsd.org To: Kris Kennaway In-Reply-To: <20070618233858.GA79358@rot13.obsecurity.org> Message-ID: <20070618173721.K36450@ns1.feral.com> References: <4676BAF0.4030703@gmail.com> <20070618180813.GA13003@eos.sc1.parodius.com> <322073cc0706181415o17ecd532i971d8bdf5ea1dafd@mail.gmail.com> <20070618221022.GA17952@eos.sc1.parodius.com> <20070618233858.GA79358@rot13.obsecurity.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Jeremy Chadwick , Martin Turgeon , freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: i386 with PAE or AMD64 on PowerEdge with 4G RAM X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: mjacob@freebsd.org List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 00:37:55 -0000 On Mon, 18 Jun 2007, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 03:10:22PM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 05:15:30PM -0400, Martin Turgeon wrote: >>> My setup is fairly standard (as I described), should I expect problem with >>> 64 bit version of these programs? >> >> Like I said, I don't run 64-bit OSes because I prefer compatibility. >> Believe me, the instant you run into some quirky problem with either the >> kernel or any of its subsystems, or a third-party program (from ports or >> otherwise), the first thing you'll be told is "it works for me on i386, >> have you tried i386?" > > I think this assertion is false. amd64 is pretty well supported and > run by an increasing number of users and developers. Not only that, but I missed an important bug in i386 because I generally run nothing *but* amd64/Xeon by now. From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 19 07:56:20 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E487916A400; Tue, 19 Jun 2007 07:56:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from stefan.lambrev@sun-fish.com) Received: from blah.sun-fish.com (blah.sun-fish.com [217.18.249.150]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C4ED13C447; Tue, 19 Jun 2007 07:56:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from stefan.lambrev@sun-fish.com) Received: from blah.sun-fish.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by blah.sun-fish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E8941B10EFB; Tue, 19 Jun 2007 09:39:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from hater.cmotd.com (hater.cmotd.com [192.168.3.125]) by blah.sun-fish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B6881B10EF8; Tue, 19 Jun 2007 09:39:56 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4677884C.2080604@sun-fish.com> Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 10:39:56 +0300 From: Stefan Lambrev User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.4 (X11/20070615) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Martin Turgeon References: <4676BAF0.4030703@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4676BAF0.4030703@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1251; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP on BLAH Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: i386 with PAE or AMD64 on PowerEdge with 4G RAM X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 07:56:21 -0000 Hi, Martin Turgeon wrote: > Good afternoon, > > I just receive 2 PowerEdge servers (a 1950 and a 860) both with 4G of > RAM. I installed FreeBSD 6.2 Release i386 on both of them. > Unfortunately, only 3,5G is recognized on the 860 and 3,3G on the 1950. > dmesg on 860: > real memory = 3757834240 (3583 MB) > avail memory = 3678318592 (3507 MB) > > I am facing a difficult decision. Should I use i386 with PAE enabled > in the kernel (I read a lot of warnings using it) or should I go with > AMD64? Which branch should I follow? > > These servers will be front-end/back-end MySQL(with replication) and > Apache servers with BIND, Postfix, Dovecot, PF. I have NO problems with FreeBSD AMD64, at least not more then I have with i386 versions. I do not see a problem to run MySQL, apache, BIND,Postfix and PF - as I use them myself for near 2 years under freebsd amd64. I even can say that at some point amd64 becomes more stable (for me) then i386. The major problem (again for me) is that there is no way to connect 64bit apache under freebsd to Oracle DB. Saying that I'm quite happy using FreBSD amd64 (even for desktop/laptop machines) and knowing how broken is PAE .. just go for amd64. > > There is the detailled configuration of the servers: > PowerEdge 1950 > Xeon 5110 > 4G RAM > PERC 5 Raid controller (mfi) > Dual Broadcom 5708 (bce) > > PowerEdge 860 > Xeon 3070 > 4G RAM > LSI Logic Raid controller (mpt) > Dual Broadcom 5750 (bge) If you still consider PAE check very carefully that all your drivers work OK with PAE kernel! > > Thanks a lot for your advice, > > Martin > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" -- Best Wishes, Stefan Lambrev ICQ# 24134177 From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 19 16:31:13 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F0F916A46B for ; Tue, 19 Jun 2007 16:31:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from turgeon.martin@gmail.com) Received: from py-out-1112.google.com (py-out-1112.google.com [64.233.166.180]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F5B313C45E for ; Tue, 19 Jun 2007 16:31:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from turgeon.martin@gmail.com) Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id a29so3918586pyi for ; Tue, 19 Jun 2007 09:31:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=TRORcqp4p3jQAYjwZ78EP+yYXY37csByV/8l2Ec3bcXOj8Sd8PqOOj2SjZixyEs940Lx+R5IF/Zi1m4V16OQG3eUbFYpMm6P38WQKDjekCRccHqth3FOZosl2fApSpaEQcRMgRcyXuxDPRgF3JGUFhMy14r52fUjzCyX0pRxesI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=WbEQqIhpIoyi1cydKWxUqGHq37vRghJGwdavg/l6kApzXM6Ikp5KGdnKmyeHYMbbtB4A0mQkqRzoAp9yEOzvRVzXfx83Oun5x42NkehuJnasmowxSlMjS/YPFifgt53TMiTQ5fxmncKsc0BeqUczRYGV1jITnARB01oE7iWmsKc= Received: by 10.35.103.6 with SMTP id f6mr12920309pym.1182270672418; Tue, 19 Jun 2007 09:31:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?192.168.3.200? ( [69.70.75.162]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 18sm28329376nzo.2007.06.19.09.31.07 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 19 Jun 2007 09:31:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <467804CE.1050705@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 12:31:10 -0400 From: Martin Turgeon User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.4 (Windows/20070604) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stefan Lambrev References: <4676BAF0.4030703@gmail.com> <4677884C.2080604@sun-fish.com> In-Reply-To: <4677884C.2080604@sun-fish.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: i386 with PAE or AMD64 on PowerEdge with 4G RAM X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 16:31:13 -0000 Thank you all for your advices, I will take a try with AMD64. I'm always impressed by the support on the FreeBSD mailinglist, continue your good work. Martin Stefan Lambrev a écrit : > Hi, > > Martin Turgeon wrote: >> Good afternoon, >> >> I just receive 2 PowerEdge servers (a 1950 and a 860) both with 4G of >> RAM. I installed FreeBSD 6.2 Release i386 on both of them. >> Unfortunately, only 3,5G is recognized on the 860 and 3,3G on the 1950. >> dmesg on 860: >> real memory = 3757834240 (3583 MB) >> avail memory = 3678318592 (3507 MB) >> >> I am facing a difficult decision. Should I use i386 with PAE enabled >> in the kernel (I read a lot of warnings using it) or should I go with >> AMD64? Which branch should I follow? >> >> These servers will be front-end/back-end MySQL(with replication) and >> Apache servers with BIND, Postfix, Dovecot, PF. > I have NO problems with FreeBSD AMD64, at least not more then I have > with i386 versions. > > I do not see a problem to run MySQL, apache, BIND,Postfix and PF - as > I use them myself for near 2 years under freebsd amd64. > > I even can say that at some point amd64 becomes more stable (for me) > then i386. > The major problem (again for me) is that there is no way to connect > 64bit apache under freebsd to Oracle DB. > > Saying that I'm quite happy using FreBSD amd64 (even for > desktop/laptop machines) and knowing how broken is PAE .. just go for > amd64. > >> >> There is the detailled configuration of the servers: >> PowerEdge 1950 >> Xeon 5110 >> 4G RAM >> PERC 5 Raid controller (mfi) >> Dual Broadcom 5708 (bce) >> >> PowerEdge 860 >> Xeon 3070 >> 4G RAM >> LSI Logic Raid controller (mpt) >> Dual Broadcom 5750 (bge) > If you still consider PAE check very carefully that all your drivers > work OK with PAE kernel! >> >> Thanks a lot for your advice, >> >> Martin >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list >> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to >> "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jun 21 22:26:25 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1D4D16A48F; Thu, 21 Jun 2007 22:26:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from tim.des.no (tim.des.no [194.63.250.121]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FF4313C45A; Thu, 21 Jun 2007 22:26:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from tim.des.no (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spam.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12B9B20B1; Fri, 22 Jun 2007 00:26:21 +0200 (CEST) X-Spam-Tests: AWL X-Spam-Learn: disabled X-Spam-Score: 0.0/3.0 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.0 (2007-05-01) on tim.des.no Received: from dwp.des.no (des.no [80.203.243.180]) by smtp.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBD0D20AB; Fri, 22 Jun 2007 00:26:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: by dwp.des.no (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 184275B8A; Fri, 22 Jun 2007 00:26:51 +0200 (CEST) From: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= To: Jeremy Chadwick References: <4676BAF0.4030703@gmail.com> <20070618180813.GA13003@eos.sc1.parodius.com> <322073cc0706181415o17ecd532i971d8bdf5ea1dafd@mail.gmail.com> <20070618221022.GA17952@eos.sc1.parodius.com> Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 00:26:50 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20070618221022.GA17952@eos.sc1.parodius.com> (Jeremy Chadwick's message of "Mon\, 18 Jun 2007 15\:10\:22 -0700") Message-ID: <868xadj651.fsf@dwp.des.no> User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.3 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Martin Turgeon , freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: i386 with PAE or AMD64 on PowerEdge with 4G RAM X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 22:26:25 -0000 Jeremy Chadwick writes: > Like I said, I don't run 64-bit OSes because I prefer compatibility. > Believe me, the instant you run into some quirky problem with either the > kernel or any of its subsystems, or a third-party program (from ports or > otherwise), the first thing you'll be told is "it works for me on i386, > have you tried i386?" Absolute nonsense. FreeBSD is just as solid on amd64 as on i386, and the people who do most of the kernel work in FreeBSD tend to have up-to-date hardware (meaning Athlon64, Opteron, or Core 2). DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des@des.no From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jun 21 22:32:09 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4011E16A46F for ; Thu, 21 Jun 2007 22:32:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from tim.des.no (tim.des.no [194.63.250.121]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED26E13C48A for ; Thu, 21 Jun 2007 22:32:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from tim.des.no (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spam.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49D3920A4; Fri, 22 Jun 2007 00:16:07 +0200 (CEST) X-Spam-Tests: AWL X-Spam-Learn: disabled X-Spam-Score: 0.0/3.0 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.0 (2007-05-01) on tim.des.no Received: from dwp.des.no (des.no [80.203.243.180]) by smtp.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1CA5208A; Fri, 22 Jun 2007 00:16:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: by dwp.des.no (Postfix, from userid 1001) id E300F5B88; Fri, 22 Jun 2007 00:16:36 +0200 (CEST) From: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= To: Mike Meyer References: <4676BAF0.4030703@gmail.com> <20070618180813.GA13003@eos.sc1.parodius.com> <18038.53391.265513.66864@bhuda.mired.org> Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 00:16:36 +0200 In-Reply-To: <18038.53391.265513.66864@bhuda.mired.org> (Mike Meyer's message of "Mon\, 18 Jun 2007 14\:35\:59 -0400") Message-ID: <86d4zpj6m3.fsf@dwp.des.no> User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.3 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Jeremy Chadwick , Martin Turgeon , freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: i386 with PAE or AMD64 on PowerEdge with 4G RAM X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 22:32:09 -0000 Mike Meyer writes: > I find that extremely ironic. I've spent most of the last two days > trying to put together a Linux system with python 2.5 (or later) and > lxml 1.2 (or later), because I need to add an oracle library to it. > While both FreeBSD and darwin ports (where I do development) have all > the appropriate bits except oracle, the Linux distros don't have any > of them in their packaging systems. Bollocks. des@des ~% cat /etc/lsb-release=20 DISTRIB_ID=3DUbuntu DISTRIB_RELEASE=3D7.04 DISTRIB_CODENAME=3Dfeisty DISTRIB_DESCRIPTION=3D"Ubuntu 7.04" des@des ~% uname -m x86_64 des@des ~% python --version Python 2.5.1 des@des ~% sudo apt-get install python-lxml Password: Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 Reading state information... Done Suggested packages: python-lxml-dbg The following NEW packages will be installed: python-lxml 0 upgraded, 1 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded. Need to get 662kB of archives. After unpacking 2052kB of additional disk space will be used. Get:1 http://no.archive.ubuntu.com feisty/universe python-lxml 1.1.2-1ubunt= u2 [662kB] Fetched 662kB in 3s (203kB/s)=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 Selecting previously deselected package python-lxml. (Reading database ... 105301 files and directories currently installed.) Unpacking python-lxml (from .../python-lxml_1.1.2-1ubuntu2_amd64.deb) ... Setting up python-lxml (1.1.2-1ubuntu2) ... Any more nonsense you wish to share? DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des@des.no From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jun 22 01:32:53 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE9F716A421 for ; Fri, 22 Jun 2007 01:32:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from etc@fluffles.net) Received: from auriate.fluffles.net (cust.95.160.adsl.cistron.nl [195.64.95.160]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EA5313C48C for ; Fri, 22 Jun 2007 01:32:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from etc@fluffles.net) Received: from 195-241-125-45.dsl.ip.tiscali.nl ([195.241.125.45] helo=[10.0.0.18]) by auriate.fluffles.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.66 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1I1Y0r-00014b-LV; Fri, 22 Jun 2007 03:32:37 +0200 Message-ID: <467B26BC.4070403@fluffles.net> Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 03:32:44 +0200 From: Fluffles User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.4 (Windows/20070604) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?UTF-8?B?RGFnLUVybGluZyBTbcO4cmdyYXY=?= References: <4676BAF0.4030703@gmail.com> <20070618180813.GA13003@eos.sc1.parodius.com> <322073cc0706181415o17ecd532i971d8bdf5ea1dafd@mail.gmail.com> <20070618221022.GA17952@eos.sc1.parodius.com> <868xadj651.fsf@dwp.des.no> In-Reply-To: <868xadj651.fsf@dwp.des.no> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Jeremy Chadwick , Martin Turgeon , freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: i386 with PAE or AMD64 on PowerEdge with 4G RAM X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 01:32:53 -0000 Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: > Jeremy Chadwick writes: > >> Like I said, I don't run 64-bit OSes because I prefer compatibility. >> Believe me, the instant you run into some quirky problem with either the >> kernel or any of its subsystems, or a third-party program (from ports or >> otherwise), the first thing you'll be told is "it works for me on i386, >> have you tried i386?" >> > > Absolute nonsense. FreeBSD is just as solid on amd64 as on i386, and > the people who do most of the kernel work in FreeBSD tend to have > up-to-date hardware (meaning Athlon64, Opteron, or Core 2). > > DES > His point was compatiblity, not stability. And he also mentioned the portstree where many ports are known to be broken for AMD64. Also, it's worth mentioning that nVidia (and probably others) have no AMD64 drivers for FreeBSD which means fallback on "nv" driver for X.org with extremely poor performance. On my 7600GT that meant the opengl performance equivalent of a sub Riva TNT card, not really impressive. And isn't it true that the cause for these missing AMD64 drivers from nVidia is some missing memory mapping issue on FreeBSD AMD64? In that sense it *is* a kernel issue. URL: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/2006-June/016995.html While it is mostly 'proprietary' software that has AMD64 issues, there are lots of ports that are known broken on AMD64 and for this reason (again: compatibility) many people who want to use AMD64 feel i386 is a safer choice. For dedicated servers AMD64 might be great, provided it runs only software known to work on AMD64. However, for more complex setups or desktops i think i386 is a much safer choice. From a user standpoint, there might only be one tier-1 platform; i386. - Veronica From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jun 22 02:17:58 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EDE616A400 for ; Fri, 22 Jun 2007 02:17:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mwm-dated-1183340966.be0575@mired.org) Received: from mired.org (vpn.mired.org [66.92.153.74]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A448213C469 for ; Fri, 22 Jun 2007 02:17:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mwm-dated-1183340966.be0575@mired.org) Received: (qmail 34580 invoked by uid 1001); 22 Jun 2007 01:49:26 -0000 Received: by bhuda.mired.org (tmda-sendmail, from uid 1001); Thu, 21 Jun 2007 21:49:25 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: <18043.10917.530533.189861@bhuda.mired.org> Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 21:49:25 -0400 To: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= In-Reply-To: <86d4zpj6m3.fsf@dwp.des.no> References: <4676BAF0.4030703@gmail.com> <20070618180813.GA13003@eos.sc1.parodius.com> <18038.53391.265513.66864@bhuda.mired.org> <86d4zpj6m3.fsf@dwp.des.no> X-Mailer: VM 7.19 under Emacs 21.3.1 X-Primary-Address: mwm@mired.org X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,&SiLvbbz2W`; h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ X-Delivery-Agent: TMDA/1.1.11 (Ladyburn) From: Mike Meyer Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Jeremy Chadwick , Martin Turgeon , freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: i386 with PAE or AMD64 on PowerEdge with 4G RAM X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 02:17:58 -0000 In <86d4zpj6m3.fsf@dwp.des.no>, Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav type= d: > Mike Meyer writes: > > I find that extremely ironic. I've spent most of the last two days > > trying to put together a Linux system with python 2.5 (or later) an= d > > lxml 1.2 (or later), because I need to add an oracle library to it.= ^^^ > > While both FreeBSD and darwin ports (where I do development) have a= ll > > the appropriate bits except oracle, the Linux distros don't have an= y > > of them in their packaging systems. > Bollocks. No, that taste in your mouth is crow. > des@des ~% cat /etc/lsb-release=20 > DISTRIB=5FID=3DUbuntu > DISTRIB=5FRELEASE=3D7.04 > DISTRIB=5FCODENAME=3Dfeisty > DISTRIB=5FDESCRIPTION=3D"Ubuntu 7.04" > des@des ~% uname -m > x86=5F64 > des@des ~% python --version > Python 2.5.1 > des@des ~% sudo apt-get install python-lxml [...] > Unpacking python-lxml (from .../python-lxml=5F1.1.2-1ubuntu2=5Famd64.= deb) ... > Setting up python-lxml (1.1.2-1ubuntu2) ... =09=09=09 ^^^^^ > Any more nonsense you wish to share=3F The only nonsense here is that you apparently think 1.1.2 is later than 1.2. 1.2 is the earliest version of lxml with XInclude support, and I need that. The package you just installed doesn't have it. Ubuntu 7.04 with python 2.5.1 and lxml 1.1.2 was one of the distros I checked (and by far the best Linux system of the bunch), and it isn't up to the job at hand. =09=09=09http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more informatio= n.