Re: [bitfolk] 64 or 32 bits?

Top Page
Author: Andy Smith
Date:  
To: users
Subject: Re: [bitfolk] 64 or 32 bits?

Reply to this message
gpg: Signature made Wed Nov 18 21:35:49 2015 UTC
gpg: using DSA key 2099B64CBF15490B
gpg: Good signature from "Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net>" [unknown]
gpg: aka "Andrew James Smith <andy@strugglers.net>" [unknown]
gpg: aka "Andy Smith (UKUUG) <andy.smith@ukuug.org>" [unknown]
gpg: aka "Andy Smith (BitFolk Ltd.) <andy@bitfolk.com>" [unknown]
gpg: aka "Andy Smith (Linux User Groups UK) <andy@lug.org.uk>" [unknown]
gpg: aka "Andy Smith (Cernio Technology Cooperative) <andy.smith@cernio.com>" [unknown]
Hello,

On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 11:36:57AM +0000, Philip Storry wrote:
> There's a very old wiki page which states:
> " 32 or 64-bit?
> At the time of writing, all BitFolk VPSes are 32-bit. Almost all
> VPSes have a small amount of memory, thus do not run up against the
> address space limits inherent in 32-bit platforms. Also, a 64-bit
> platform has larger pointers and integers so would actually use more
> memory for the same tasks.


I think it's probably time to flip to 64-bit being the default, with
32-bit being optional. Something I'll tackle after the hardware is
all upgraded.

I don't know what the trade-off is like with larger binaries vs.
more registers but probably it's quite small otherwise I expect
someone would have produced benchmarks. :)

Cheers,
Andy

--
http://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting