From: Christopher Browne <cbbrowne@acm.org>
Subject: Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards?
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 22:51:42 -0400
Organization: cbbrowne Computing Inc
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <87zmghzs1t.fsf@wolfe.cbbrowne.com>
References: <1150151282.14661.42.camel@tigger>
	<54CA6A16-AB42-440D-B5DB-BC43AE283ED8@blighty.com>
	<448E11B1.20309@commandprompt.com>
	<1BAED8DB-01CE-4D10-A509-91FB4DF1F04D@blighty.com>
	<33c6269f0606121926p15107d2fq9d395460269e2e53@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
User-Agent: Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) XEmacs/21.4.19 (linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:yCCfuKmze5uXiwilwgfLOfZkyQ8=
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org

Martha Stewart called it a Good Thing when armtuk@gmail.com ("Alex Turner") wrote:
> Anyone who has tried x86-64 linux knows what a royal pain in the ass
> it is.   They didn't do anything sensible, like just make the whole
> OS 64 bit, no, they had to split it up, and put 64-bit libs in a new
> directory /lib64.  This means that a great many applications don't
> know to check in there for libs, and don't compile pleasantly, php
> is one among them.  I forget what others, it's been awhile now.  Of
> course if you actualy want to use more than 4gig RAM in a pleasant
> way, it's pretty much essential.  Alex.

That's absolute nonsense.

I have been running the Debian AMD64 port since I can't recall when.
I have experienced NO such issues.

Packages simply install, in most cases.

When I do need to compile things, they *do* compile pleasantly.

I seem to recall hearing there being "significant issues" as to how
Red Hat's distributions of Linux coped with AMD64.  That's not a
problem with Linux, of course...
-- 
"cbbrowne","@","gmail.com"
http://linuxdatabases.info/info/spreadsheets.html
"Imagine a law so stupid that civil obedience becomes an efficient way
to fighting it" --Per Abrahamsen on the DMCA