Re: [Haifux] Running 32 bit applications (Firefox?) on 64 bit machines
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011, Tzafrir Cohen wrote about Re: [Haifux] Running 32 bit applications (Firefox?) on 64 bit?machines: Another thing I forgot: Try building Firefox (with debug information and such). IIRC you'll need more than 4GB of memory space. And this is far from being the only program. I'm curious - why is that? In the old days, when men were men and computers had small memories, programmers actually went into great lengths to make sure that the algorithms and data structures which they used did not assume that everything can fit in memory. I remember my great pride in Unix's vi which could edit a file far larger than RAM (heck, even 1 MB used to be larger than RAM!), while Windows' notepad insisted to stick the whole file in RAM and thrash like crazy. I can only regret that Firefox reached 4 GB of code size (!?), but it's an even bigger shame if the tool chain - gcc or ld or whatever - cannot work well without holding all that stuff in RAM concurrently. Nadav. -- Nadav Har'El| Monday, Aug 22 2011, 22 Av 5771 n...@math.technion.ac.il |- Phone +972-523-790466, ICQ 13349191 |Microchips: what's left at the bottom of http://nadav.harel.org.il |the bag when it reaches you. ___ Haifux mailing list Haifux@haifux.org http://hamakor.org.il/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haifux
Re: [Haifux] Running 32 bit applications (Firefox?) on 64 bit machines
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011, Orna Agmon Ben-Yehuda wrote about Re: [Haifux] Running 32 bit applications (Firefox?) on 64 bit machines: I forgot to mention that sometimes, on really funny occasions, you get a performance penalty from using the 64bit code. For example, when you take a number close to 1 (1.0001) to a power. You will get absolutely stuck with the 64bit code. This is really bizarre... I wonder how x86 and x86-64 differ in that regard? -- Nadav Har'El| Monday, Aug 22 2011, 22 Av 5771 n...@math.technion.ac.il |- Phone +972-523-790466, ICQ 13349191 |Unix is simple, but it takes a genius to http://nadav.harel.org.il |understand its simplicity. ___ Haifux mailing list Haifux@haifux.org http://hamakor.org.il/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haifux
Re: [Haifux] Running 32 bit applications (Firefox?) on 64 bit machines
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 09:36:59PM +0300, Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote: On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 07:32:29PM +0300, Eli Billauer wrote: It's not like I expect Firefox to address 1 GB of RAM. There's no 1GB of RAM limitation with 32 bit. Perhaps you meant 4GB of RAM? So it really makes me wonder: Why are the preinstalled binaries on a 64 bit machine, well, 64 bit executables? I run a 64 bit machine because I want the *overall* RAM to exceed 4 GB, but except for virtual machines, I don't expect any application to have problems with the 32 bit limitation. I speculate that the best reason, from the distribution's point of view, is that it is simpler to only maintain and support one environment (64 bit) rather than maintain and support co-existing 32 bit and 64 bit environments. Distributions will grudgingly carry both 32 bit and 64 bit versions of an application where there 64 bit version is deficient in some sense (e.g., firefox with flash) but would naturally like to minimize these hassles. From a distribution's point a view, on 64bit x86 it is actually safe to assume that you have some useful optimization and a resonably recent CPU. That said, Debian and Ubuntu are now switching to MultiArch support as well. It is said to be better designed than the current bi-arch support in RPM-based releases. But it only just now got to the stage of being useful enough to actually confuse users. So we'll just have to wait and see. -- Tzafrir Cohen | tzaf...@jabber.org | VIM is http://tzafrir.org.il || a Mutt's tzaf...@cohens.org.il || best tzaf...@debian.org|| friend ___ Haifux mailing list Haifux@haifux.org http://hamakor.org.il/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haifux
Re: [Haifux] Running 32 bit applications (Firefox?) on 64 bit machines
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011, guy keren wrote about Re: [Haifux] Running 32 bit applications (Firefox?) on 64 bit machines: because this is progress - to move to a 64-bit operating system, and running all the applications in 64-bit mode. Indeed. I'm amazed every time somebody tells me he just had a 32-bit version of Windows or Linux installed. x86-64, the 64-bit extensions to the x86 architecture, have been on every AMD processor for eight (!) years, and on every Intel processor for about six years. -- Nadav Har'El| Sunday, Aug 21 2011, 21 Av 5771 n...@math.technion.ac.il |- Phone +972-523-790466, ICQ 13349191 |To decide or not to decide, that is the http://nadav.harel.org.il |question. Or is it? ___ Haifux mailing list Haifux@haifux.org http://hamakor.org.il/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haifux
Re: [Haifux] Running 32 bit applications (Firefox?) on 64 bit machines
Thank you all for your answers. I suppose the conclusion is that using 32 bits for application is a nice workaround for applications that cause trouble as 64 bits, unless it's really computation intensive (simulations etc.). Maintaining the necessary 32 bit libraries is a not fun, but nothing compared to waiting for this and that binary plugin to work correctly. Since the performance issue was mentioned more than once, I'll say that my hunch is that except for real number crunchers (finite elements simulations, video encoding and stuff Orna plays around with) most applications are limited by data starvation (cache misses), so the extra registers allowed for in x86_64 aren't necessary making any real difference. In particular when it comes to browsers, word processors, maybe even video rendering and compilation. But this is really just a hunch. So 32 bit for Firefox it is. As for the rest, well, who cares, as long as it works. Eli -- Web: http://www.billauer.co.il ___ Haifux mailing list Haifux@haifux.org http://hamakor.org.il/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haifux
Re: [Haifux] Running 32 bit applications (Firefox?) on 64 bit machines
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 07:32:29PM +0300, Eli Billauer wrote: Hi, It has suddenly hit me, that there's no apparent reason to run most executables as 64 bits on a x86_64 machine. I mean, what for? It's not like I expect Firefox to address 1 GB of RAM. If it does, let it crash. On the other hand, plugins and other binaries for 64 bits is a headache. Flash player tops the list, I suppose. So it really makes me wonder: Why are the preinstalled binaries on a 64 bit machine, well, 64 bit executables? I run a 64 bit machine because I want the *overall* RAM to exceed 4 GB, but except for virtual machines, I don't expect any application to have problems with the 32 bit limitation. Another thing I forgot: Try building Firefox (with debug information and such). IIRC you'll need more than 4GB of memory space. And this is far from being the only program. -- Tzafrir Cohen | tzaf...@jabber.org | VIM is http://tzafrir.org.il || a Mutt's tzaf...@cohens.org.il || best tzaf...@debian.org|| friend ___ Haifux mailing list Haifux@haifux.org http://hamakor.org.il/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haifux
Re: [Haifux] Running 32 bit applications (Firefox?) on 64 bit machines
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 6:40 PM, Eli Billauer e...@billauer.co.il wrote: Thank you all for your answers. I suppose the conclusion is that using 32 bits for application is a nice workaround for applications that cause trouble as 64 bits, unless it's really computation intensive (simulations etc.). Maintaining the necessary 32 bit libraries is a not fun, but nothing compared to waiting for this and that binary plugin to work correctly. Since the performance issue was mentioned more than once, I'll say that my hunch is that except for real number crunchers (finite elements simulations, video encoding and stuff Orna plays around with) most applications are limited by data starvation (cache misses), so the extra registers allowed for in x86_64 aren't necessary making any real difference. In particular when it comes to browsers, word processors, maybe even video rendering and compilation. But this is really just a hunch. I forgot to mention that sometimes, on really funny occasions, you get a performance penalty from using the 64bit code. For example, when you take a number close to 1 (1.0001) to a power. You will get absolutely stuck with the 64bit code. So 32 bit for Firefox it is. As for the rest, well, who cares, as long as it works. Eli -- Web: http://www.billauer.co.il __**_ Haifux mailing list Haifux@haifux.org http://hamakor.org.il/cgi-bin/**mailman/listinfo/haifuxhttp://hamakor.org.il/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haifux -- Orna Agmon Ben-Yehuda. http://ladypine.org ___ Haifux mailing list Haifux@haifux.org http://hamakor.org.il/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haifux
[Haifux] Running 32 bit applications (Firefox?) on 64 bit machines
Hi, It has suddenly hit me, that there's no apparent reason to run most executables as 64 bits on a x86_64 machine. I mean, what for? It's not like I expect Firefox to address 1 GB of RAM. If it does, let it crash. On the other hand, plugins and other binaries for 64 bits is a headache. Flash player tops the list, I suppose. So it really makes me wonder: Why are the preinstalled binaries on a 64 bit machine, well, 64 bit executables? I run a 64 bit machine because I want the *overall* RAM to exceed 4 GB, but except for virtual machines, I don't expect any application to have problems with the 32 bit limitation. Insights? Eli P.S. Just changed my Firefox to 32 bits. Had to install some libraries manually to get Flash Player going: yum install libpk-gtk-module.so libcanberra-gtk-module.so libcurl.i686 (thanks goes to strace as usual). -- Web: http://www.billauer.co.il ___ Haifux mailing list Haifux@haifux.org http://hamakor.org.il/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haifux
Re: [Haifux] Running 32 bit applications (Firefox?) on 64 bit machines
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 07:32:29PM +0300, Eli Billauer wrote: It's not like I expect Firefox to address 1 GB of RAM. There's no 1GB of RAM limitation with 32 bit. Perhaps you meant 4GB of RAM? So it really makes me wonder: Why are the preinstalled binaries on a 64 bit machine, well, 64 bit executables? I run a 64 bit machine because I want the *overall* RAM to exceed 4 GB, but except for virtual machines, I don't expect any application to have problems with the 32 bit limitation. I speculate that the best reason, from the distribution's point of view, is that it is simpler to only maintain and support one environment (64 bit) rather than maintain and support co-existing 32 bit and 64 bit environments. Distributions will grudgingly carry both 32 bit and 64 bit versions of an application where there 64 bit version is deficient in some sense (e.g., firefox with flash) but would naturally like to minimize these hassles. Cheers, Muli -- Muli Ben-Yehuda | http://www.mulix.org ___ Haifux mailing list Haifux@haifux.org http://hamakor.org.il/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haifux
Re: [Haifux] Running 32 bit applications (Firefox?) on 64 bit machines
because this is progress - to move to a 64-bit operating system, and running all the applications in 64-bit mode. mixing between 32-bit and 64-bit is not such a good idea. and why do you think firefox doesn't get above 1GB of RAM? on my system it currently takes 1.2GB of virtual memory (with 24 tabs open). not that it'll have a problem to do this in 32-bit mode (where it can use close to 3GB of virtual memory). --guy On Sat, 2011-08-20 at 19:32 +0300, Eli Billauer wrote: Hi, It has suddenly hit me, that there's no apparent reason to run most executables as 64 bits on a x86_64 machine. I mean, what for? It's not like I expect Firefox to address 1 GB of RAM. If it does, let it crash. On the other hand, plugins and other binaries for 64 bits is a headache. Flash player tops the list, I suppose. So it really makes me wonder: Why are the preinstalled binaries on a 64 bit machine, well, 64 bit executables? I run a 64 bit machine because I want the *overall* RAM to exceed 4 GB, but except for virtual machines, I don't expect any application to have problems with the 32 bit limitation. Insights? Eli P.S. Just changed my Firefox to 32 bits. Had to install some libraries manually to get Flash Player going: yum install libpk-gtk-module.so libcanberra-gtk-module.so libcurl.i686 (thanks goes to strace as usual). ___ Haifux mailing list Haifux@haifux.org http://hamakor.org.il/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haifux
Re: [Haifux] Running 32 bit applications (Firefox?) on 64 bit machines
At least in Debian you can install an x86 32 bit arch and later on install a 64 bit kernel to get what you want. All apps will be 32 bit but the kernel will run in 64 bits. There are moves underfoot to make Debian multiarch enabled and then you'll be able to run 32 bit and 64 bit apps on the same machine and decide for yourself which subset should run on how many bits. Baruch On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 7:32 PM, Eli Billauer e...@billauer.co.il wrote: Hi, It has suddenly hit me, that there's no apparent reason to run most executables as 64 bits on a x86_64 machine. I mean, what for? It's not like I expect Firefox to address 1 GB of RAM. If it does, let it crash. On the other hand, plugins and other binaries for 64 bits is a headache. Flash player tops the list, I suppose. So it really makes me wonder: Why are the preinstalled binaries on a 64 bit machine, well, 64 bit executables? I run a 64 bit machine because I want the *overall* RAM to exceed 4 GB, but except for virtual machines, I don't expect any application to have problems with the 32 bit limitation. Insights? Eli P.S. Just changed my Firefox to 32 bits. Had to install some libraries manually to get Flash Player going: yum install libpk-gtk-module.so libcanberra-gtk-module.so libcurl.i686 (thanks goes to strace as usual). -- Web: http://www.billauer.co.il __**_ Haifux mailing list Haifux@haifux.org http://hamakor.org.il/cgi-bin/**mailman/listinfo/haifuxhttp://hamakor.org.il/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haifux ___ Haifux mailing list Haifux@haifux.org http://hamakor.org.il/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haifux
Re: [Haifux] Running 32 bit applications (Firefox?) on 64 bit machines
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 7:32 PM, Eli Billauer e...@billauer.co.il wrote: Hi, It has suddenly hit me, that there's no apparent reason to run most executables as 64 bits on a x86_64 machine. I mean, what for? It's not like I expect Firefox to address 1 GB of RAM. If it does, let it crash. On the other hand, plugins and other binaries for 64 bits is a headache. Flash player tops the list, I suppose. So it really makes me wonder: Why are the preinstalled binaries on a 64 bit machine, well, 64 bit executables? I run a 64 bit machine because I want the *overall* RAM to exceed 4 GB, but except for virtual machines, I don't expect any application to have problems with the 32 bit limitation. Insights? There is a performance penalty for running 32-bit on 64-bit, and the extent of it it very much depends both on your processor (Intel/AMD) and your application. Eli P.S. Just changed my Firefox to 32 bits. Had to install some libraries manually to get Flash Player going: yum install libpk-gtk-module.so libcanberra-gtk-module.so libcurl.i686 (thanks goes to strace as usual). -- Web: http://www.billauer.co.il __**_ Haifux mailing list Haifux@haifux.org http://hamakor.org.il/cgi-bin/**mailman/listinfo/haifuxhttp://hamakor.org.il/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haifux -- Orna Agmon Ben-Yehuda. http://ladypine.org ___ Haifux mailing list Haifux@haifux.org http://hamakor.org.il/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haifux
