GSI Forum
GSI Helmholtzzentrum für Schwerionenforschung

Home » Scientific Computing » Linux OS » Xeon's, Opteron's, 32 vs 64 bit -- Next steps for the GSI batch farm
Re: Xeon's, Opteron's, 32 vs 64 bit -- Next steps for the GSI batch farm [message #1553 is a reply to message #1550] Wed, 30 March 2005 13:18 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Anar Manafov is currently offline  Anar Manafov
Messages: 81
Registered: August 2004
Location: Germany, Darmstadt
continuous participant

From: kp1pc34.gsi.de
Thanks for the links. It is very interesting to me!

Christo, I still have some questions concerning Debian 64b instillation:
Quote:


This port is actually considered beta.


Quote:


So, when it is released?

The first planned official Debian release of 64bit userland for AMD64 will be Etch (Sarge+1).

The unofficial sarge based on the debian-amd64 port will be ready shortly after the official sarge release, and will have security updates provided by the amd64 porting team.


Quote:


Debian-pure64 is still classified "beta" by the porters, while debian-pure64-3.4 is classified "experimental". The port is being worked at since the beginning of 2004, and many people use it for both workstations and servers. Lacking a stable distribution, the port is not recommended for "mission critical production systems" until sarge released.

There are 64bit related problems in approximately 200 packages, which result either in the package not building at all or simply segfaulting on startup. The latter problem should not show up too often, only in first releases of new upstream versions of some packages wich had the problem in the past. The vast majority of packages with known 64bit problems do not build at all.



Is this is a TRUE?
Are we going to install something which is a beta? Doesn't look like GSI policy.
Or the document you pointed is not up to date and the release is done and tested already?
I am sure we will not install beta and going to wait until release, but another question, are we going to install the FIRST 64b release?
I would be very proud to work on the edge of technology, but it is quite unsafe and will require a lot of effort. But you know me, I would be the first to participate and do my best.


If we use 32b chroot, don't it slower down a bit the 32b processes? Redirection and kind of stuff… It looks like the same solution as Microsoft chooses for the Windows 2003 Server (64b edition).

Anyway, as I understand correctly, IT division needs to maintain at least two environments, and several kernels. Since GSI can't get 64b machines for change of Entire Park, right?

I still think that we are to hurry to switch to 64b environment. It is too early. I would give some time, until the software became stable and not the FIRST release, FIRST TRY! Also the prices will be lower for higher performance.

Even if the experiments software will be completely ported (which I am really doubt), we will have some problems to run it on other sites, like CERN. I think CERN is going to keep 32b architecture for some time, and not only the CERN.


BTW, this document (Multiple architecture problem and proposed solution) you pointed is really GOOD! Thx!!!

Christopher Huhn wrote on Wed, 30 March 2005 10:35


You already have access to one of the machines (lxts09) for a while?!

No, I think I don't have the access. Anyway, I am going to come to you and ask Smile Rolling Eyes



1 horsepower = 745.699872 Watts
 
Read Message icon4.gif
Read Message icon14.gif
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: Welcome to the Linux forum
Next Topic: Intel® C++ Compiler for Linux
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sun Aug 01 13:50:45 CEST 2021

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02276 seconds