From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1IBtPk-0007p8-Ah for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 20 Jul 2007 14:25:04 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l6KENERl007445; Fri, 20 Jul 2007 14:23:14 GMT Received: from relay.sgi.com (netops-testserver-3-out.sgi.com [192.48.171.28]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l6KENCKt007440 for ; Fri, 20 Jul 2007 14:23:13 GMT Received: from cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (cthulhu.engr.sgi.com [192.26.80.2]) by netops-testserver-3.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EB5E908A2 for ; Fri, 20 Jul 2007 07:23:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conejo.engr.sgi.com (conejo.engr.sgi.com [150.166.8.69]) by cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id l6KENBHs007803 for ; Fri, 20 Jul 2007 07:23:12 -0700 Received: from conejo.engr.sgi.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by conejo.engr.sgi.com (SGI-8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l6KENBBx410169 for ; Fri, 20 Jul 2007 07:23:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from rsanders@localhost) by conejo.engr.sgi.com (SGI-8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/Submit) id l6KENBUU410078 for gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org; Fri, 20 Jul 2007 07:23:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2007 07:23:11 -0700 From: Bob Sanders To: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-amd64] 32 or 64 for web server and mysql Message-ID: <20070720142311.GC407376@sgi.com> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org References: <46A0B6C6.5000803@singnet.com.sg> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <46A0B6C6.5000803@singnet.com.sg> Organization: SGI, Mountain View, California, U.S.A. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Archives-Salt: 35b5b7ac-cdb3-4941-a09e-9ae32682306e X-Archives-Hash: 2be953c98fb366c267d956a623fe1217 to add to what Mark said - P.V.Anthony, mused, then expounded: > Hi, > > I going to built a 1U server which will have the following. > > 1. Apache 2 > 2. Lighttpd Why both web servers? > 3. qmail (Can't comment on this, using postfix) > 4. vpopmail (Haven't used any pop mail) > 5. mysql > 6. postgres > 7. ruby > 8. php > 9. perl > 10. tinydns (Have only used this on 32-bit systems) > 11. pureftpd > 12. high availblity tools for fail over > (Haven't used thes, as I've had no failures) > The question is which way to go 64bit or 32bit? Which more stable? Which > is better? > I've run a couple of servers, 64-bit, for several years now - one since 2004, and have had only one minor issue with the LSI MPT driver, but that was fixed in 2.6.18. My main uses have been file serving and some mail, along with backing up other servers via rsnapshot on a daily basis. Unlike more conservative admins, I run daily updates, with the exception of critical software - kernel, dhcp, tftp, ftp, and nfs. And those still get updated after I verify them. > The reason for this questions is that there are some information on the > net that says that there is no much difference between them. > Is that true? Thought that 64bit is always better. > There are issues with digital media codecs and web browsers. But these are servers. Also, note that the vast majority of Unix and Open source tools have been run 64-bit for several decades on Unix and BSD boxes. While the amd64 instruction set is a bit newer, and 32-bit code has been run on millions of boxes, the 64-bit variants are as stable as anything else. Bob - -- gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list