I myself recently had the misfortune of trying to get a java program
relying on the (apparently 32-bit only) JMF package to run on 64-bit
linux. This wasted almost an entire week of my life! I tried
downgrading the operating system to 32-bit, but that reduced the number
of CPUs available in
I tell you. Technology just doesn't work.
developers and user's don't, technology is usually ok, but I feel your pain.
On Apr 13, 2012, at 1:24 PM, James Holton wrote:
I tried downgrading the operating system to 32-bit, but that reduced the
number of CPUs available in the system from 24 to 8. Still don't know why
that is
I'm probably wrong, but I'll guess that a 32 bit operating system can only
spare 3
No, that's a limit set by the ubuntu 32 bit kernel maintainers when
they configured and compiled the kernel (again, see my comment about
the problem being with developers and users). I think the limit is 256
for x86, 4096 for ia64 (itanium), even old versions of RHEL supported
16 and 32 logical
On the whole, however, I have not seen any significant performance
advantage of 64 over 32 bit running crystallography programs
side-by-side on equivalent hardware. I have also been unimpressed with
the supposed memory access advantages of 64 bit. I had to do a LOT of
recompiling programs in
Hi David
I'm curious - do you mean running on a 32-bit Centos box or running
the 32-bit Mosflm executable on a 64-bit Centos box?
We did have one report of problems with the 32-bit exe on a 64-bit
box, which (seemingly) randomly gave one of two different results
(either the same failure
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dear Tom,
64-bit is about memory addressing - why would you expect a performance
boost? I have wondered where this notion originated from.
Cheers,
Tim
On 04/03/12 22:07, Tom Peat wrote:
We use the 64 bit Centos (Red Hat) distro and CCP4, Coot, etc
: Wednesday, 4 April 2012 6:43 PM
To: Peat, Tom (CMSE, Parkville)
Cc: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] Who is using 64-bit Linux?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dear Tom,
64-bit is about memory addressing - why would you expect a performance
boost? I have wondered where
...@shelx.uni-ac.gwdg.de]
Sent: Wednesday, 4 April 2012 6:43 PM
To: Peat, Tom (CMSE, Parkville)
Cc: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] Who is using 64-bit Linux?
Dear Tom,
64-bit is about memory addressing - why would you expect a performance
boost? I have wondered where
Dear Tim,
64-bit is about memory addressing - why would you expect a performance
boost? I have wondered where this notion originated from.
The x86_64 architecture has more registers than 32bit (x86)
architecture. Register access is faster than memory access so
the more data programs can put
. If it has no
performance boost, why would they bother?
Cheers, tom
-Original Message-
From: Tim Gruene [mailto:t...@shelx.uni-ac.gwdg.de]
Sent: Wednesday, 4 April 2012 6:43 PM
To: Peat, Tom (CMSE, Parkville)
Cc: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] Who is using 64-bit
PM
To: Peat, Tom (CMSE, Parkville)
Cc: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] Who is using 64-bit Linux?
Dear Tom,
64-bit is about memory addressing - why would you expect a performance
boost? I have wondered where this notion originated from.
Cheers,
Tim
On 04/03/12
]
Sent: Wednesday, 4 April 2012 6:43 PM
To: Peat, Tom (CMSE, Parkville)
Cc: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UKmailto:CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] Who is using 64-bit Linux?
Dear Tom,
64-bit is about memory addressing - why would you expect a performance
boost? I have wondered where
We use the 64 bit Centos (Red Hat) distro and CCP4, Coot, etc seem to work fine
on this.
I can't say I notice a big performance boost from the 64 bit side of things.
Maybe I'm just impatient.
cheers, tom
Tom Peat
Biophysics Group
CSIRO, CMSE
343 Royal Parade
Parkville, VIC, 3052
+613 9662
Whatever you do, make sure you have enough bottled water before the next
doomsday:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_2038_problem
I am using 64-bit linux almost exclusively for some time now. XRD
software works fine, no lingering issues that I can report. ia32-libs
do the trick for 32-bit
I have RHEL62-64 in a win 7-64 8GB desktop VMware installation. CCP4, ccp4i,
coot, and shelxcde beta executables run fine.
There were issues with the coot package installation due to unresolved
dependencies
and my ignorance thereof, but I think a working RHEL62-64 compatible package
is available
We have been using 64 bit Linux for several years. I'm not aware of any
lingering issues with the 64 bit-ness.
Linux is always sprinkling in a few new bugs, but I don't know of any
current issues with 32 bit vs. 64 bit.
On 04/03/12 15:57, Roger Rowlett wrote:
The time has come for me to
Hi Roger
CCP4 and Mosflm work fine in my testing - I do builds for Linux and
Macs, both 32 and 64 bits. I wouldn't expect to see a difference in
performance (and don't see anything significant in practice).
One thing - I think you will need to install 32-bit compatibility
libraries for
Fedora and RHEL 64-bit work well and run pretty much all
the standard programs (CCP4/Coot/Phenix/CNS/SHELX). By
installing the relevant 32-bit libraries you can also run
older programs if need be.
On a related note, XtalView will work on Fedora/RHEL if
you install/compile the appropriate
Roger,
My lab is using 64 bit distros of SUSE and Linux Mint and hasn't had
any compatibility issues that I can recall.
Ho
Ho Leung Ng
University of Hawaii at Manoa
Assistant Professor, Department of Chemistry
h...@hawaii.edu
Date:Tue, 3 Apr 2012 15:57:40 -0400
From:Roger Rowlett
20 matches
Mail list logo
