RobJ Posted January 29, 2013 Share Posted January 29, 2013 Time to find out if we can move straight to 64bit only, or need to support 32bit a while longer. (All subject to Tom's wishes of course!) How to find out if you are 64bit capable? http://www.cyberciti.biz/faq/linux-how-to-find-if-processor-is-64-bit-or-not/ Or simply, at a console or in a Telnet session: (quote from NAS) grep --color=always -iw lm /proc/cpuinfo If it is 64bit capable, you should see "lm" in red. Quote Link to comment
pfp Posted January 29, 2013 Share Posted January 29, 2013 2 servers, both 32bit only. No interest in upgrading MB/CPU on either of them. I apparently misinterpreted how to test this. It appears both my servers are 64bit capable after all. Quote Link to comment
RobJ Posted January 29, 2013 Author Share Posted January 29, 2013 2 servers, both 32bit only. No interest in upgrading MB/CPU on either of them. Thanks, that is exactly what Tom needs to know. Edit: see edited post above Quote Link to comment
jbartlett Posted January 29, 2013 Share Posted January 29, 2013 The wording "I'm 64bit capable, and want it NOW" is a bit harsh so I had to go with the other 64bit option. I'm "I'm 64bit capable, and I want it" Quote Link to comment
neilt0 Posted January 29, 2013 Share Posted January 29, 2013 Why can't there be 32 and 64-bit builds? I think I have 2 64-bit systems, but I only power up the second one once a week, so it'll be a while before I check. Quote Link to comment
neilt0 Posted January 29, 2013 Share Posted January 29, 2013 Is this 64-bit? grep flags /proc/cpuinfo flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 ht syscall nx mmxext fxsr_opt pdpe1gb rdtscp lm 3dnowext 3dnow constant_tsc nonstop_tsc extd_apicid pni monitor cx16 popcnt lahf_lm cmp_legacy svm extapic cr8_legacy abm sse4a 3dnowprefetch osvw ibs skinit wdt nodeid_msr hw_pstate npt lbrv svm_lock nrip_save flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 ht syscall nx mmxext fxsr_opt pdpe1gb rdtscp lm 3dnowext 3dnow constant_tsc nonstop_tsc extd_apicid pni monitor cx16 popcnt lahf_lm cmp_legacy svm extapic cr8_legacy abm sse4a 3dnowprefetch osvw ibs skinit wdt nodeid_msr hw_pstate npt lbrv svm_lock nrip_save Quote Link to comment
PeterB Posted January 29, 2013 Share Posted January 29, 2013 Is this 64-bit? Yes. I only have two 32 bit machines left - one is a laptop and the other is a small form box, based on laptop hardware. Both are more than five years old. Quote Link to comment
jowi Posted January 29, 2013 Share Posted January 29, 2013 I want to know what the benefits for a 64 bits kernel are for unRAID... i think a lot of people just think 'twice the bits, so twice as fast' or 'more bits is better' Quote Link to comment
WeeboTech Posted January 29, 2013 Share Posted January 29, 2013 Is this 64-bit? grep flags /proc/cpuinfo flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 ht syscall nx mmxext fxsr_opt pdpe1gb rdtscp lm 3dnowext 3dnow constant_tsc nonstop_tsc extd_apicid pni monitor cx16 popcnt lahf_lm cmp_legacy svm extapic cr8_legacy abm sse4a 3dnowprefetch osvw ibs skinit wdt nodeid_msr hw_pstate npt lbrv svm_lock nrip_save flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 ht syscall nx mmxext fxsr_opt pdpe1gb rdtscp lm 3dnowext 3dnow constant_tsc nonstop_tsc extd_apicid pni monitor cx16 popcnt lahf_lm cmp_legacy svm extapic cr8_legacy abm sse4a 3dnowprefetch osvw ibs skinit wdt nodeid_msr hw_pstate npt lbrv svm_lock nrip_save grep flags /proc/cpuinfo | grep lm It is the lm what we are interested in. Quote Link to comment
RobJ Posted January 29, 2013 Author Share Posted January 29, 2013 The wording "I'm 64bit capable, and want it NOW" is a bit harsh so I had to go with the other 64bit option. I'm "I'm 64bit capable, and I want it" Yeah, I thought so myself, when I went to vote, and I wrote the thing! But I felt there was a segment who do feel more strongly about this, so wanted the poll to reflect that (sort of a poll within a poll). Quote Link to comment
peter_sm Posted January 29, 2013 Share Posted January 29, 2013 Time to move on to 64bit, since 32bit it's little to old platform these days ;-) //Peter Quote Link to comment
nars Posted January 29, 2013 Share Posted January 29, 2013 Should UnRAID be 32bit, 64bit, or maintain a version of both? Where is the option for "maintain a version of both" ? My server is 64bit capable but I guess many other people may still run some 32bit only p4's that are still good for unraid... my vote would be support both, if possible, or at least maintain a 5.0 32bit version by just fixing important bugs etc even if no new features get added on it... Quote Link to comment
lainie Posted January 29, 2013 Share Posted January 29, 2013 When I purchased my server for unRAID last year it was a 64bit system, but the 1 CPU it came with was a dual core 1.86GHz processor. As unRAID was only capable of 32bit processing & I wanted more speed, when I purchased faster (2 dual core 3GHz CPUs), I did not check if it was 32 or 64 bit... turns out I purchased the 32bit version. I thought it was beefy enough to survive a few major upgrades, but if 32bit goes away... I guess my options are a slower single CPU (which I still have) with an up-to-date OS on it -or- much faster CPUs with an older OS... I blew my computer budget at the time of my upgrades... Some of the RAM in my desktop Windows PC went bad & I have not even been able to replace it (which is painfully obvious that I need it). I voted to keep 32bit support available for a little longer... would vote to maintain both 32 & 64 if it were available as a poll option. Quote Link to comment
limetech Posted January 29, 2013 Share Posted January 29, 2013 I want to know what the benefits for a 64 bits kernel are for unRAID... i think a lot of people just think 'twice the bits, so twice as fast' or 'more bits is better' Better memory management, nothing more. Quote Link to comment
RobJ Posted January 29, 2013 Author Share Posted January 29, 2013 Should UnRAID be 32bit, 64bit, or maintain a version of both? Where is the option for "maintain a version of both" ? My server is 64bit capable but I guess many other people may still run some 32bit only p4's that are still good for unraid... my vote would be support both, if possible, or at least maintain a 5.0 32bit version by just fixing important bugs etc even if no new features get added on it... Well, hmmm.... I completely forgot to make that option clear. I was trying to design the poll so that the results would clearly indicate the right choice, whether 32bit or 64bit or both. I suppose the 'don't care which I run' option is the closest. I don't like to modify a poll once started, it somewhat invalidates previous votes. Quote Link to comment
limetech Posted January 29, 2013 Share Posted January 29, 2013 A better poll question would be this: If you have 4GB or RAM or less you can run either 32-bit or 64-bit kernel, provided your CPU is 64-bit. If you have more then 4GB of RAM you must run the 64-bit kernel. Is this acceptable? [Yes or No or explain in comments] If answer here is Yes, then I could produce two kernels with each build: - a non-PAE 32-bit kernel - an x86_64 kernel BTW, current kernel as PAE-capable 32-bit but I've always thought PAE is a hack. Quote Link to comment
jbartlett Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 Probably the real advantage to having 64bit support is being able to have more than 4GB of RAM and thus able to add more to the UNRAID box - such as plugins and other applications. Quote Link to comment
RobJ Posted January 30, 2013 Author Share Posted January 30, 2013 A better poll question would be this: If you have 4GB or RAM or less you can run either 32-bit or 64-bit kernel, provided your CPU is 64-bit. If you have more then 4GB of RAM you must run the 64-bit kernel. Is this acceptable? [Yes or No or explain in comments] If answer here is Yes, then I could produce two kernels with each build: - a non-PAE 32-bit kernel - an x86_64 kernel Not sure we even need a poll for this, we probably all think this would be perfect, so long as it isn't too much extra effort. Anyone think of any objections to this? Quote Link to comment
opentoe Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 Having more memory will no doubt let unRaid evolve into something a lot larger then what it is now. I'm not even sure I have a 64bit system or not. I think this is a 64bit system. unRAID Server Pro, Version 5.0-rc10 Motherboard: Intel - DQ35MP Processor: Intel® CoreTM2 Duo CPU E6750 @ 2.66GHz - 2.666 GHz Cache: L1 = 4096 kB L2 = 32 kB L3 = 32 kB Memory: 8 GB - DIMM0 = 667 MHz DIMM1 = 667 MHz DIMM2 = 667 MHz DIMM3 = 667 MHz Network: 1000Mb/s - Full Duplex Uptime: 17 days, 17 hrs, 43 mins, 43 secs Quote Link to comment
Helmonder Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 Tom: fully agree. Quote Link to comment
mrow Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 I'm not even sure I have a 64bit system or not. I think this is a 64bit system. It is. Look at "Instruction Set". http://ark.intel.com/products/30784/Intel-Core2-Duo-Processor-E6750-4M-Cache-2_66-GHz-1333-MHz-FSB Quote Link to comment
BetaQuasi Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 A better poll question would be this: If you have 4GB or RAM or less you can run either 32-bit or 64-bit kernel, provided your CPU is 64-bit. If you have more then 4GB of RAM you must run the 64-bit kernel. Is this acceptable? [Yes or No or explain in comments] If answer here is Yes, then I could produce two kernels with each build: - a non-PAE 32-bit kernel - an x86_64 kernel BTW, current kernel as PAE-capable 32-bit but I've always thought PAE is a hack. Perfect. Quote Link to comment
lainie Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 Can't change my vote, but came here to thank burr for PM-ing me & update my above statement. I do have a 64bit CPU & do not care which version (32 or 64) that I run. I have 8GB of RAM that could benefit from the 64bit. Happy to know I should be able to run either. Why I thought I had a 32bit: The link to my CPU info from my hw thread no longer works. I swear there used to be 2 pages on the Xeon 5160, one for SLABS which is 64bit & one for SL9RT (that I have) which is 32bit. I see links to SLABS & SL9RT on the side of this page on the 5160, but don't see it mentioning 32bit instructions anywhere now. My output showing lm flags: root@Lament:~# uname -a Linux Lament 3.4.24-unRAID #1 SMP Mon Jan 7 16:44:53 PST 2013 i686 Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU 5160 @ 3.00GHz GenuineIntel GNU/Linux root@Lament:~# root@Lament:~# grep flags /proc/cpuinfo |grep lm flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe nx lm constant_tsc arch_perfmon pebs bts aperfmperf pni dtes64 monitor ds_cpl vmx est tm2 ssse3 cx16 xtpr pdcm dca lahf_lm dtherm tpr_shadow flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe nx lm constant_tsc arch_perfmon pebs bts aperfmperf pni dtes64 monitor ds_cpl vmx est tm2 ssse3 cx16 xtpr pdcm dca lahf_lm dtherm tpr_shadow flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe nx lm constant_tsc arch_perfmon pebs bts aperfmperf pni dtes64 monitor ds_cpl vmx est tm2 ssse3 cx16 xtpr pdcm dca lahf_lm dtherm tpr_shadow flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe nx lm constant_tsc arch_perfmon pebs bts aperfmperf pni dtes64 monitor ds_cpl vmx est tm2 ssse3 cx16 xtpr pdcm dca lahf_lm dtherm tpr_shadow root@Lament:~# Quote Link to comment
S80_UK Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 Question derived from my own lack of detailed Linux knowledge... Some of us (self included) run a variety of unofficial add-ons. For example, I run Twonky Media Server version 6.0.39. That's currently very stable on unRAID 5.0RC11 and all previous betas and RCs that I have tried it with. Would migration to a 64-bit kernel mean that I would need to change to a different solution or a different version of Twonky? I guess the real question is are older (presumably 32-bit) applications still able to be used? Quote Link to comment
bubbaQ Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 If answer here is Yes, then I could produce two kernels with each build: - a non-PAE 32-bit kernel - an x86_64 kernel Sounds perfect to me. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.