I'm sorry, but if you're using a 32-bit PAE kernel to address more that 4 GiB of RAM on a *64-bit machine* you are completely and utterly doing it wrong (In fact, you're doing it stupid.). PAE is slower, can't address anywhere near as much as native 64-bit can, and isn't as stable.
Heck, even the Linux devs would rather people use native 64-bit than PAE on 64-bit machines. Unless there's some actual reason, like a 32-bit application you absolutely can't live without doesn't work with multilib, there is 100% no reason not to use 64-bit OS on a 64-bit CPU, and about several dozen good reasons why it's a stupid idea to limit yourself to 32-bit. On Thu, 2013-06-27 at 23:15 -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote: > On 6/27/2013 10:12 PM, Gary Dale wrote: > > On 27/06/13 10:56 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote: > > >> You don't have to change anything. 32 bit Sid will run just fine on an > >> x86-64 CPU. Switching to 64 bit software is a choice, not a requirement. > > > Not really. > > Yes, really. This is fact. Don't disagree with facts Gary, especially > when I am the one stating them. And don't do it with a flexible spine. > If you're going to disagree with me, take a firm stance. > > > 32bit systems have memory limitations that you don't > > encounter with 64bit. > > There are two such limitations when using a PAE kernel and 32bit user > space on x86-64, which are the same limitations on P6 class CPUs: > > 1. 64GB maximum physical memory > 2. 2GB per process address space > > ~99.9999% of desktop Linux users will never exceed either of these. The > same number of users have less than 64GB physical memory. For those who > have trouble with percentages, this is 1 in a million users. > > Given your propensity for disagreeing with facts, I'll assume that you > are also the type of person who infers intentions, or a position, that > do not in fact exist. So I'll spell it out clearly: > > I am not *advocating* that people in masse run a 32bit software platform > on x86-64 hardware. What I've done is state a valid option that may be > preferable to the OP who posed the question. > > Instead of disagreeing with me, with the facts I presented, you should > have simply stated your case for a full 64bit platform, in a standalone > manner directly replying to the OP's post instead of my factual reply. > > -- > Stan > > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1372393211.24775.10.camel@twilight.heartbeat
