Re: [j-nsp] force-64bit

This is not completely contradictory with the Juniper doc ; as usual with the Juniper doc written with feet, you have to read between the lines: -> Written in the doc: "Tip: You need not restart the routing protocol process (rpd) to use the 64-bit mode" -> To be understood: "Joke: You need not

Re: [j-nsp] force-64bit

On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Saku Ytti wrote: > On 1 June 2016 at 20:32, Phil Rosenthal wrote: > > I suspect that there is not that high of a risk of bugs due to this > change, in all likelihood, the only changes required for this was a > different compiler

Re: [j-nsp] force-64bit

❦ 1 juin 2016 18:22 CEST, Phil Rosenthal  : > Even on systems with many peers, 5+ full tables, and a full IGP mesh, > I haven’t seen rpd much over 1GB of ram in use. 64bit rpd would only > be beneficial if you have a need for a rpd process using more than 4GB > of ram. The

Re: [j-nsp] force-64bit

I’ve lost a rpd suddenly during daily ops a couple of month ago by OOM, ATAC investigated the issue for months and conclusion was solely OOM. Referring to my question, Tim says "Enabling this will cause RPD to restart as you kill one process and start another.“. That’s what I suspected, but is

Re: [j-nsp] force-64bit

On 1 June 2016 at 20:32, Phil Rosenthal wrote: > I suspect that there is not that high of a risk of bugs due to this change, > in all likelihood, the only changes required for this was a different > compiler and perhaps the use of a few 64 bit instead of 32 bit variables — >

Re: [j-nsp] force-64bit

Once upon a time, Phil Rosenthal said: > I suspect that there is not that high of a risk of bugs due to this change, > in all likelihood, the only changes required for this was a different > compiler and perhaps the use of a few 64 bit instead of 32 bit variables — > but even

Re: [j-nsp] force-64bit

Once upon a time, Phil Rosenthal said: > Even on systems with many peers, 5+ full tables, and a full IGP mesh, I > haven’t seen rpd much over 1GB of ram in use. 64bit rpd would only be > beneficial if you have a need for a rpd process using more than 4GB of ram. The break

Re: [j-nsp] force-64bit

> On Jun 1, 2016, at 10:35 AM, Tim Hoffman wrote: > > 64bit RPD is newer, and by nature will have more bugs - so don't run this > unless you need it. Check this with "show task memory" - this will show what > you have used of the RPD accessible memory. As Phil notes,

Re: [j-nsp] force-64bit

Hello We use it since Junos 14.2. No bug encountered related to this feature. It depends on your sizing. As Tim said check the RPD memory - Just never reach the 80%. David Tim Hoffman via juniper-nsp a écrit 64bit RPD is newer, and by nature will have more bugs - so don't run

Re: [j-nsp] force-64bit

64bit RPD is newer, and by nature will have more bugs - so don't run this unless you need it. Check this with "show task memory" - this will show what you have used of the RPD accessible memory. As Phil notes, you'd need significant RIB scale (which does exist in larger networks) to require

Re: [j-nsp] force-64bit

I’ll ask the obvious question — do you actually have a ‘need’ for this? Even on systems with many peers, 5+ full tables, and a full IGP mesh, I haven’t seen rpd much over 1GB of ram in use. 64bit rpd would only be beneficial if you have a need for a rpd process using more than 4GB of ram. Is

[j-nsp] force-64bit

Hi, has anybody enabled „system processes force-64bit“ on 64bit Junos? Have you done this during daily ops or during a maintenance window? According to Juniper documentation [1] rpd must not be restarted to enable 64-bit mode: „You need not restart the routing protocol process (rpd) to use the