On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 9:33 PM, Alexander Larsson <alexl@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, 2012-05-16 at 15:30 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: >> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 04:28:31PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: >> >> > Mhmm, so I was under the impression that x32 was mostly about increasing >> > the scalability of virtualized systems. i.e. run a higher number of >> > x32 containers/VM on an x86_64 host. Most server software that is run in >> > containers/VMs does not require 64bit address space, and hence using x32 >> > for them should be quite benificial so that you can run more >> > containers/VMs per host. After all this would reduce memory and CPU >> > consumption of each, and due to smaller memory usage also result in less >> > IO? >> >> I was under the impression that it was to make Android work better on >> Intel. Scalable VMs are an interesting idea, but for a typical session >> how much RAM are we talking about? > > If you look at some contemporary VM hosting providers, like e.g.: > http://bloggerkhan.com/vps-hosting-vps-servers/185 > > You'll see that most of them are in the 384-1024 meg of ram range, and > almost none are larger than 4 gigs. I'm sure most of these run 32bit > images, but the hosts are likely 64bit, so it seems to make quite some > sense to use an x32 ABI here. Can x32 run i686 software (multilib) ? Because not being able to run existing software might be a reason for many to want such a host. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
