On Wed, 2006-05-10 at 19:19 -0400, Chris Mauritz wrote:
> Chris Mauritz wrote:
> > Max H. wrote:
> >> Congrats to the CentOS@Home Folding Team! I see we're creeping up to
> >> break the 700 rank for teams.
> >>
> >
> > We should make even more headway soon as I just took delivery of a
> > bunch of dual opteron systems which need to be stress tested for a few
> > weeks prior to deployment. 8-)
> > Cheers,
>
> ....which reminds me. I haven't delved into the 64-bit CentOS on
> production machines yet. Are there any glaring potential gotchas for
> generic LAMP type usage? They won't be doing anything exotic...just
> serving up web content and perhaps replace some dedicated DNS/bind and
> mail/postfix boxes. All the old systems being replaced are currently
> running CentOS 3.7 and I'd like to start migrating everything to 64-bit 4.3.
>
So long as you are just doing server stuff and can keep everything
x86_64 and keep i386 packages off the box, x86_64 works great.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20060510/d5bf59b7/attachment.bin
