Date: Mon, 02 May 2005 02:16:58 -0300 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jo=E3o_Carlos_Mendes_Lu=EDs?= <jonny@jonny.eng.br> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Mike Tancsa <mike@sentex.net> Subject: Re: 64bit CPUs Message-ID: <4275B7CA.9040701@jonny.eng.br> In-Reply-To: <20050502044655.E78953@fledge.watson.org> References: <6.2.1.2.0.20050501094429.06974910@64.7.153.2> <20050502044655.E78953@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Robert Watson wrote:
> On Sun, 1 May 2005, Mike Tancsa wrote:
>> A somewhat obvious question to some perhaps, but what server=20
>> application mix on FreeBSD today sees an improvement using 64bit CPUs =
>> ? In my ISP centric world, my big apps are BIND, IMAP/POP3, httpd via=
=20
>> apache, SMTP, AV and SPAM scanning, and firewalls/routing. Apart from=
=20
>> larger RAM, why would these benefit from the 64bit world ? Or would=20
>> they ?
>=20
> RAM/address space is the big reason. In fact, applications compiled fo=
r=20
> 64-bits may well run slower than 32-bit ones running on the 64-bit=20
> kernel. Note that systems like Solaris default build many programs as=20
> 32-bit, since there's no benefit to running ls(1) with a 64-bit address=
=20
> space.
Should I understand from this that, in the long term, FreeBSD will=20
take the same path as Solaris, and have a dual (32bit/64bit) userland on =
amd64 arch?
Jonny
--=20
Jo=E3o Carlos Mendes Lu=EDs - Networking Engineer - jonny@jonny.eng.br
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4275B7CA.9040701>