Koozali.org: home of the SME Server
Obsolete Releases => SME Server 7.x => Topic started by: tspoon1986 on September 01, 2009, 06:10:26 AM
-
Hi,
Excuse my ignorance, but after a bit of research I'm still confused as to whether or not SME can be run as a 64-bit operating system.
We're getting a new server next year that will have a 64-bit processor (Intel Xeon Quad Core 5500 Series), and although we have loved and used SME for years, I'd like to get the most out of the new processor.
As far as I can tell (and I'm happy to be corrected) a 32-bit operating system can be run on 64-bit hardware, but it can't take advantage of the extra memory capability and in some cases may operate more slowly due to the overhead of emulating a 32-bit processor.
Does SME 7 come in a 64-bit version? Will SME 8? It appears to me that CentOS 5 comes in a 64-bit version, although whether they mean a native 64-bit version or a 32-bit OS on 64-bit hardware I can't tell.
Can someone help me sort this out?
-
tspoon1986
Does SME 7 come in a 64-bit version?
No
Will SME 8?
No
Do an Advanced Search on the forums for 64 bit for the brief discussions that took place. Not enough demand and certainly not enough developers.
-
Thanks Mary. I did try to do a search but couldn't find much. It's a shame SME won't be in a 64-bit version, but I do understand the reasons.
-
it's not a shame, it's unnecessary as CentOS/SME kernel (only smp) can handle an huge ram amount.
there are no real advantages to move SME to 64bit arch
my 2c
Stefano
-
it's not a shame, it's unnecessary as CentOS/SME kernel (only smp) can handle an huge ram amount.
there are no real advantages to move SME to 64bit arch
That is not completely true. There are other benefits although they are minor for server appliances IMHO as they have a wider bandwidth on for instance the I/O bus.
-
... and perhaps KVM on SME8 (RH5.4) !
-
... and perhaps KVM on SME8 (RH5.4) !
I doubt that as Xen as a host OS is also not supported at the moment, the resources of the development team are very limited.
-
As far as I can tell (and I'm happy to be corrected) a 32-bit operating system can be run on 64-bit hardware, but it can't take advantage of the extra memory capability and in some cases may operate more slowly due to the overhead of emulating a 32-bit processor.
The 32bit OS in SME8 can use all the memory you can throw at it - but not in any one single program.
There is no emulation of a 32-bit processor, and no overhead in doing that.
There just aren't the capabilities of handling very large software objects (very large data sets and very large programs). There are also some inefficiencies inside the kernel if you have a very large amount of RAM, because it is not all directly addressable at any one time.
-
That is not completely true. There are other benefits although they are minor for server appliances IMHO as they have a wider bandwidth on for instance the I/O bus.
ok.. but we are talking about SME, i.e. something that (teorically) should apply to medium enterprise.. if you really need to use all the "power" of the 64 bit architecture then, maybe, SME is not the right product for you :-)
Stefano
-
I'm not sure sure the argument that 32bit is sufficient stands anymore. I run several SME servers and dearly wish they would support large memory (16GB in my case). There are several reasons why this is important.
1) Large memory allows the OS to cache more files and can significantly increase file server performance. In this day and age even a few users can consume large amounts of data so even small offices will benefit from this.
2) I am running several websites in ibays, several of which have large databases, these would benefit greatly from a larger memory space.
3) tmpfs caching of read only files. This is a trick I use to dramatically speed up a critical website, I can mount a tmpfs filesystem to an I bay path then I copy all http files to a tmpfs at startup. This makes this critical site fly. A similar trick can be used with a web proxy cache to speed up browsing.
While I fully understand that there is simply no resources to implement a 64bit version I do find it a pity, at some point I would even posture that 32bit support should be dropped and only 64bit supported, 64bit Linux can run on most processors releases since 2004 and eventually we need to move on or get left behind.
Dave.
-
hi
please read this (http://www.centos.org/product.html) page: Centos4 (and so SME) can handle up to 64 GB of ram (using hugemem kernel).. the only limit is that you can't have a single process using more than (approx) 4GB of ram..
if you need something more you should move to Centos 64bit.. but, I repeat, we are talking about SME, (i.e. Small Medium Enterprise)
do you really need SME 64 bit?
all IMVHO
Stefano
-
Stefano thanks for the reply and I am very glad to have hugemem supported. However it really does not help in many cases. For example it would not allow me to create a 8GB tmpfs area or allow mysql to use a large memory model or even for the nfs to cache more than 4GB of inode info. That said, hugemem support is at least something and I am very glad to have it.
While I could move to Centos native or any number of other distributions I would hate to do so. I am a staunch SME supporter and will work around the limitations. SME really is one of the best, most secure and sensibly maintained distributions available, all the people here work hard on this and I have been using it many years since e-smith days.
My point is not that we should support native 64bit now, just that we should plan for it eventually (SME 9? 10?) The huge memory model may not be supported forever and it is not a fix for all limitations. I routinely have to set Java instances to 3GB and its only a matter of time until common middleware applications will be demanding >4GB. If we don't at least entertain native 64bit support at some point in the future we will be marginalized. How may 16bit paged memory systems do you still see around today?
Dave.
-
My point is not that we should support native 64bit now, just that we should plan for it eventually (SME 9? 10?)
Check the forums for a thread on 64bit development, as you will see there was no where near enough donations/interest for a 64bit platform so I don't see one coming unless someone offers a substantial cost to develop a 64bit platform. Who said there is going to be a SME 9 or 10? SME 8 isn't out yet and has been under development/beta testing for nearly 2 or so years.
-
If you are referring to this thread:
http://forums.contribs.org/index.php/topic,33017.0.html
The poll was closed over 3 years ago and many of the comments are also very old. Much can change in that amount of time. If it were still open I would offer cash and my time to help develop, document and test the thing.
As for v9 v10, I agree, in a community effort such as this it is very hard to predict what the future holds. Back when Mitel held control I seriously doubted we would ever see version 6 or a move of Redhat 9 but here we are looking at a beta for version 8.
The current all be it small group of developers and others really need to be commended for their great work to date.
Dave.
-
Here's one small sample set of data for Centos downloads: http://iso.linuxquestions.org/centos/centos-5.3/
In short:
DISTRO DOWNLOADS PERCENT
TORRENT-X86 1,423 12.69%
TORRENT-X86_64 443 3.95%
X86 7,562 67.45%
X86_64 1,783 15.90%
11,211 100.00%
I suppose 64 will be developed when one of the following happens:
-a developer(s) gets a serious itch and can't take it anymore and develops it.
-a user(s) donates so much that convinces a developer(s) to put it on his or her task list.
-the demand from users gets so overwhelming that it can't be ignored anymore.
None of the above has happened yet. Please note that anyone can, in theory, fulfill the first two above requirements.
-
Here's one small sample set of data for Centos downloads: http://iso.linuxquestions.org/centos/centos-5.3/
In short:
and so? :-)
what part of "no, there's no 64bit SME at this moment and it's very difficult that a 64 bit version of SME will see the light in the next future?" isn't clear? :-)
Stefano
-
Ok, I'll expand... You can see from the above sample set, that 80.14% of the downloads were 32bit & 19.86% were 64bit. We can tell from these recent numbers (and not from the poll that "was closed over 3 years ago and many of the comments are also very old") that the user demand for 64bit still significantly lags behind the demand for 32bit albeit the 64bit demand seems to be growing.
If the 64bit percentage outweighed the 32bit percentage, we could tell that demand was changing and make some decisions based on real numbers rather than just having a few users stating their point of view.
I was just trying to help give recent info to help add to the discussion since most of the posts above didn't contain any.
what part of "no, there's no 64bit SME at this moment and it's very difficult that a 64 bit version of SME will see the light in the next future?" isn't clear? :-)
I'm curious to understand why you think it wasn't clear to me. I neither said I want it nor did I give support for 64bit or against 64bit. I simply gave a recent data set and the current situation.
Your reply is completely uncalled for. Especially to the only Platinum Supporter signature in this thread.
Regards,
-
Here's one small sample set of data for Centos downloads: http://iso.linuxquestions.org/centos/centos-5.3/
Are you sure these figures are a relevant set? I recon they are only record the downloads through their site, which makes me guess that the figures from the actual download location might be (very) different.
-
If the 64bit percentage outweighed the 32bit percentage, we could tell that demand was changing and make some decisions based on real numbers rather than just having a few users stating their point of view.
No changes can be observed at a far earlier stage, actually when the numbers change.
When throwing figures and stats you need to formulate carefully and mind carefully the conclusions you draw from them.
-
Ok, I'll expand... You can see from the above sample set, that 80.14% of the downloads were 32bit & 19.86% were 64bit. We can tell from these recent numbers (and not from the poll that "was closed over 3 years ago and many of the comments are also very old") that the user demand for 64bit still significantly lags behind the demand for 32bit albeit the 64bit demand seems to be growing.
If the 64bit percentage outweighed the 32bit percentage, we could tell that demand was changing and make some decisions based on real numbers rather than just having a few users stating their point of view.
I was just trying to help give recent info to help add to the discussion since most of the posts above didn't contain any.
I'm curious to understand why you think it wasn't clear to me. I neither said I want it nor did I give support for 64bit or against 64bit. I simply gave a recent data set and the current situation.
Your reply is completely uncalled for. Especially to the only Platinum Supporter signature in this thread.
Regards,
sorry.. I misunderstood the meaning of your previous post.. I apologize :-)
Stefano
-
Your reply is completely uncalled for. Especially to the only Platinum Supporter signature in this thread.
Status does not make you more right nor should it withhold anyone from answering your posts, please do not use this in your argumentation.
-
Status does not make you more right nor should it withhold anyone from answering your posts, please do not use this in your argumentation.
I don't really understand why your posting back in such a manner. What good could come from it? It has nothing to do with the issue of the OP and is only going to drive the thread OT.
You can see that it was a miscommunication above. Couldn't you just leave it at that? I have no intention of arguing with you or anyone else around here. I was simply spending my afternoon reading some threads and helping where I can.
Status doesn't make me or anyone else "more right" but it signals where my intentions are. Common courtesy should have been enough but when it isn't, I like to remind the person I'm communicating with that my intentions are to give rather than take.
Could you imagine a community where the givers outweighed the takers? Where Platinum Sponsorship was the norm and not the exception? Where common courtesy was extended automatically to all despite the response? Where we had too many volunteers and we didn't know what to do with them? I think this type of community would be the type of community to strive for. I think everyone would want to be part of a community like that. I challenge everyone around here to strive for a community like that not only in their words but also their actions.
This is how I live my life. Giving in time, giving in experience and giving in money. Something that I've tried to do around here for many years. I even bought everyone dinner and dessert at the Salt Lake City meeting in 2007 (AFAIK, the last time we met as an organized group).
Gordon Rowell was like-minded. He even mused about such a community here:
http://forums.contribs.org/index.php/topic,35338.0.html
His words of embracing the non-developers as "something we don't do at all well" still rings true almost 3 years later.
Sadly, he's not a part of the project anymore but it shows what his desires were.
...nor should it withhold anyone from answering your posts...
I neither said it should nor implied that.
...please do not use this in your argumentation.
Gordon's number one exercise was to read the following page and note the "Registration agreement terms" at the bottom: http://www.coderanch.com/forums/user/insert
What Gordon seemed to realize was that we are great at getting the "right" answer because we live in fields (programming, physics, etc) where commas and semi-colons matter because code has to be exact to run correctly. But sometimes we end up treating relationships in a like manner because of this and end up extending our exactness to our communication.
This exactness leads to friction in relationships as all developer spouses can easily attest to. The end result is something more. We ask for help and donations yet we fail to extend common courtesy. We're quick to put in a verbal jab at any moment's notice rather than a kind word of thanks. We want people to follow yet we fail to lead in our words. We want people to volunteer yet we put effort into preventing people to do so.
No one has to help. No one has to donate. We don't have to post in the forums or WIKI. Yet we do. Although it becomes increasingly difficult to do so when we have to write a short thesis just to defend every time we post.
I think next weekend I'll just go deep sea fishing with my family. I stayed back this weekend to help around here but it seems my family was right... fishing is more rewarding than trying to help others.
Regards,
-
Hi if anyone is interested we are using our own 64bit compile of sme8b6. Reason being we use use sme8 a lot in production and we needed more than 4GB RAM without the need for PAE kernel as we heavily use kvm.
This link is a 7zipped ISO, use at your own risk
http://www.withsupport.co.uk/sme64.7z