From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 14 11:59:31 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47E9C16A407 for ; Tue, 14 Nov 2006 11:59:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (lurza.secnetix.de [83.120.8.8]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7235A43D66 for ; Tue, 14 Nov 2006 11:59:27 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (srqxab@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id kAEBxK78028264; Tue, 14 Nov 2006 12:59:25 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from oliver.fromme@secnetix.de) Received: (from olli@localhost) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.1/Submit) id kAEBxKql028263; Tue, 14 Nov 2006 12:59:20 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from olli) Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 12:59:20 +0100 (CET) Message-Id: <200611141159.kAEBxKql028263@lurza.secnetix.de> From: Oliver Fromme To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG, om-lists-bsd@omx.ch In-Reply-To: <1163455070.14157.9.camel@bigapple.omnis.ch> X-Newsgroups: list.freebsd-stable User-Agent: tin/1.8.2-20060425 ("Shillay") (UNIX) (FreeBSD/4.11-STABLE (i386)) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.1.2 (lurza.secnetix.de [127.0.0.1]); Tue, 14 Nov 2006 12:59:26 +0100 (CET) Cc: Subject: Re: 6.1 with PAE on a recent server (HP DL380 G5 or Dell PE 1950) ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG, om-lists-bsd@omx.ch List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 11:59:31 -0000 Olivier Mueller wrote: > Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > > And you absolutely have no option of running FreeBSD/amd64 on > > them? What a PITA! :-) > > Ehm well, I must admit I never tried that, for a simple (and silly?) > reason: freebsd installation selects the i386 SMP kernel by default... > > But of course if you (and Mike Jakubik) strongly suggest it would be a > good idea, why not, I will give a try asap :-) Any special thing I > should take care of when switching from the i686 kernel to the amd64 > one? The easiest way is to re-install with an /amd64 ISO. > Will the systems be quicker this way, When addressing more than 4 GB of physical RAM, a native 64bit system is certainly more efficient (hence quicker) than the PAE kludge. > or will it "just" help with this 4GB memory limit? Yes it will. With /amd64, the address space is larger than 4 GB. With /i386, it is always limited to 4 GB, no matter if you use PAE or not. (Actually the address space for user processes is even more limited: 4 GB minus the kernel's address space.) Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing Dienstleistungen mit Schwerpunkt FreeBSD: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd Any opinions expressed in this message may be personal to the author and may not necessarily reflect the opinions of secnetix in any way. "If you think C++ is not overly complicated, just what is a protected abstract virtual base pure virtual private destructor, and when was the last time you needed one?" -- Tom Cargil, C++ Journal