Results 11 to 16 of 16
I don't dispute anything you've said HROAdmin but I have first hand seen systems with PAE report a lot less RAM than the physical amount present. There is an overhead ...
- 12-12-2008 #11Linux Guru
- Join Date
- Nov 2004
- Posts
- 6,110
I don't dispute anything you've said HROAdmin but I have first hand seen systems with PAE report a lot less RAM than the physical amount present. There is an overhead to using this technology which is why I tend to recommend switching to 64-bit. (It's about the only reason so far I can come up with for the switch to 64-bit
)
- 12-12-2008 #12Linux Guru
- Join Date
- Nov 2007
- Posts
- 1,695
Then it is not configured correctly. PAE does what it has been designed to do - saying that it doesn't is simply untrue....but I have first hand seen systems with PAE report a lot less RAM than the physical amount present.
The honest answer to anonymoususer is that checking his CPU and recompiling his kernel for PAE support may be beyond his abilities.
As an example, here is a SLES 9.3 32-BIT image on a system with 6GB of RAM. Results:
Code:uname -a Linux SYSTEM_NAME 2.6.5-7.244-bigsmp #1 SMP Mon Dec 12 18:32:25 UTC 2005 i686 athlon i386 GNU/Linux
Code:free -m total used free shared buffers cached Mem: 5958 125 5832 0 20 61 -/+ buffers/cache: 44 5913 Swap: 3074 0 3074Code:cat /etc/SuSE-release SUSE LINUX Enterprise Server 9 (i586) VERSION = 9 PATCHLEVEL = 3
And here is top sorted by memory usage:Code:grep PAE /boot/config-2.6.5-7.244-bigsmp CONFIG_X86_PAE=y
Code:top - 15:42:28 up 15 min, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.08, 0.14 Tasks: 45 total, 2 running, 43 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu0 : 0.0% us, 0.0% sy, 0.0% ni, 100.0% id, 0.0% wa, 0.0% hi, 0.0% si Cpu1 : 0.0% us, 0.0% sy, 0.0% ni, 100.0% id, 0.0% wa, 0.0% hi, 0.0% si PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 10463 root 16 0 7856 2404 1956 R 0.0 0.0 0:00.03 sshd 8964 root 16 0 4740 1940 1620 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.06 sshd 10466 root 15 0 3616 1736 1312 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.02 bash 9196 root 21 0 2644 1296 1156 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 powersaved 10494 root 16 0 1784 924 728 R 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 top 9850 root 16 0 8320 904 728 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 nscd 10310 root 16 0 13004 764 636 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.16 ddtp_deviced 9848 root 16 0 1600 700 608 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 cron 7421 root 17 0 1604 644 556 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 resmgrd 10304 root 20 0 1628 608 536 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.83 mingetty 10305 root 18 0 1628 608 536 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.02 mingetty 10306 root 19 0 1628 608 536 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.01 mingetty 10307 root 20 0 1628 608 536 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.02 mingetty 10308 root 18 0 1628 608 536 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 mingetty 10309 root 18 0 1628 608 536 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 mingetty 7099 root 16 0 1532 596 404 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 klogd 7078 root 16 0 1420 524 432 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 syslogd
- 12-12-2008 #13Linux Guru
- Join Date
- Nov 2004
- Posts
- 6,110
- 12-12-2008 #14Linux Guru
- Join Date
- Nov 2007
- Posts
- 1,695
No, even if I pull a CPU, I will still have 6GB RAM. While this is a slightly older system with 2 sockets and a CPU in each, most X86 hardware now is 1-2 sockets and anything from 2-8 cores per socket. This "loading up" of multiple cores per socket has mostly invalidated trying to map RAM slots to any given CPU. It is much more prevalent in other architectures like Sparc.As in physically the RAM 'bays' are usually tied to CPUs so does this affect how the RAM is addressed?
Clearly, this is an *enterprise* build of this kernel meant for large-memory, SMP systems (hence the kernel name XXX-bigsmp), but the point is that a correctly configured 32-bit kernel can use larger RAM sizes. It is up to the user to determine if that is useful. If you run a database server and the *application* is hitting a 3-4GB process limit, adding more RAM and using PAE will not help much. Your application (with no changes) will hit the same limit.
- 12-12-2008 #15Linux Guru
- Join Date
- Nov 2004
- Posts
- 6,110
Ah I see. Thanks HROAdmin.
- 12-12-2008 #16Just Joined!
- Join Date
- Dec 2008
- Posts
- 9
HRO?
is what your trying to tell me that I can use 8 gigs and my 32bit system (provided I enable PAE of course) will recognize all 8 gigs It's just no one application will be able to use more than 4 (or 3.2 to be more exact) at a time.
Cause if that's the case I'm fine with that. I don't plan on using any apps that will take up 4 gigs. just lots and lots of little ones.
sorry if I'm not getting this by the way


Reply With Quote
