Subject: Re: dumb sparc vs. sparc64 question
To: matthew green <mrg@eterna.com.au>
From: Dave McGuire <mcguire@neurotica.com>
List: port-sparc64
Date: 03/11/2004 03:38:19
On Mar 11, 2004, at 3:28 AM, matthew green wrote:
>>       Hey folks.  Will NetBSD/sparc64 run unmodified binaries from a
>>    NetBSD/sparc system of a compatible release?
>>
>>
>> given a /emul/netbsd32 (ie, libraries, etc), and the relevant kernel
>> options (COMPAT_NETBSD32), yup.
>
>       Exactly the response I was looking for, and in a matter of hours.
>    Try to get THAT level of support with a commercial OS.  Thanks Matt!
>
>       Is there much of a performance hit over native binaries?
>
> in my testing, sometimes yes, sometimes no :-)  generally there
> is no noticable difference... specific applications may be faster
> or slower running 32 bit or 64 bit mode, but 32 bit code on 64 bit
> kernel doesn't really perform any worse than 32 bit code on 32 bit
> kernel....

   Excellent.  Again, exactly the help I was looking for.  Thanks Matt!

   I'm looking to move a production virtual-hosting web server (~20 
virtual hosts) from a SPARCstation-20 running NetBSD to either an 
Ultra1/170 or an Ultra2 with a 300MHz or 400MHz (have both here) 
processor.  The SS20 is doing fine while serving the web content (it's 
mostly static), but some other things (log processing in particular) 
take way too long.

   My current thinking is to move stuff over as-is, and recompile 
software natively a package at a time.  I'm really, really glad 
NetBSD/sparc64 has reached the point where even "paranoid old me" will 
consider using it for income-generating production use.  This is Good 
Stuff(tm).

         -Dave

--
Dave McGuire                      "My tummy hurts now, but my soul
Cape Coral, FL                   feels a little better."     -Ed