Hello everybody. I would like to know your opinions about a load test I'm doing, whose result quite shocked me. Briefly, I created a mnesia ets table and inserted 50000 records into it. I tried this bulk load on two machines: the first, say it A, running a 64bits kernel on a 64 bits machine, the second, say it B, running a 32bits kernel on a 64 bits machine. On A the records occupy 202707450 words of mem, and misuring the RAM consumption before and after the insertion I know that they occupy 1560Mb. On B the records occupy 202707473 words of mem, with a RAM consumption of 795Mb. On one hand this makes sense, because as far as I know a word of mem on a 32bits machine is 4 bytes, 8 on a 64bits machine. But does this mean that having a 64 bits kernel doubles the memory usage?!? Thank you all and happy new year, franz
________________________________________________________________ erlang-questions (at) erlang.org mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html To unsubscribe; mailto:erlang-questions-unsubscr...@erlang.org
> On one hand this makes sense, because as far as I know a word of mem on > a 32bits machine is 4 bytes, 8 on a 64bits machine. But does this mean > that having a 64 bits kernel doubles the memory usage?!?
Actually this doesn't depend on the kernel, this depends on the Erlang VM (i.e. userspace) using 32 bit or 64 bit. Generally 64 bit applications use a lot more memory.
________________________________________________________________ erlang-questions (at) erlang.org mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html To unsubscribe; mailto:erlang-questions-unsubscr...@erlang.org
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 12:46:02PM +0100, franz wrote: > I would like to know your opinions about a load test I'm doing, > whose result quite shocked me. > Briefly, I created a mnesia ets table and inserted 50000 records into it. > I tried this bulk load on two machines: the first, say it A, running > a 64bits kernel on a 64 bits machine, the second, say it B, running > a 32bits kernel on a 64 bits machine. > On A the records occupy 202707450 words of mem, and misuring the RAM > consumption before and after the insertion I know that they occupy > 1560Mb. > On B the records occupy 202707473 words of mem, with a RAM > consumption of 795Mb. > On one hand this makes sense, because as far as I know a word of mem > on a 32bits machine is 4 bytes, 8 on a 64bits machine. But does this > mean that having a 64 bits kernel doubles the memory usage?!?
When you boot a 32-bit kernel, your processor is running in a backwards-compatibility 32-bit mode, as an i386 processor. The x86_64 mode is essentially a different processor, with different instruction set and register model.
And if you boot into DOS, you'll be running 16-bit "real mode" :-)
But in summary: booting a 32-bit OS turns your machine into a 32-bit PC.
Regards,
Brian.
________________________________________________________________ erlang-questions (at) erlang.org mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html To unsubscribe; mailto:erlang-questions-unsubscr...@erlang.org
> But does this mean that having a 64 bits kernel doubles the memory usage?!?
As a general rule, running with 64-bit Erlang doubles the memory footprint. The exception is binaries, which use only marginally more space.
The OTP team is working on a "half-word" emulator, which uses a 32-bit memory space for the process heaps, but keeps other data (e.g. ETS and binaries) in 64-bit space. This VM is still experimental, but can be built with configure --enable-halfword-emulator
I admit I was tempted by the 32-bits architecture. As I'm developing a mnesia-centric distributed application I thought that using 32-bits machine would have reduced the ram consumption and the access speed. So I developed some tests to be run on two identical servers, one running a 32-bits kernel and erlang, the other 64-bits. And everything went fine, until I bumped into the "maximum heap size for 32-bit machines", which I was unaware of: when a mnesia table exceeds 3GB erlang crashes saying <<erlang eheap_alloc: Cannot allocate xxx bytes of memory (of type "heap")>>. In conclusion, for anyone wondering, I think I'm going 64. Regards, franz
________________________________________________________________ erlang-questions (at) erlang.org mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html To unsubscribe; mailto:erlang-questions-unsubscr...@erlang.org
If I remember right There was announced nice optimization of Erlang process heap using 32 "pointers" on 64-bit architecture on SFO Erlang Factory last year and I believe it is included in R14B version. Anyway I'm not sure and didn't verify.
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 10:52 AM, franz <fan...@tiscali.it> wrote: > I admit I was tempted by the 32-bits architecture. As I'm developing a > mnesia-centric distributed application I thought that using 32-bits machine > would have reduced the ram consumption and the access speed. So I developed > some tests to be run on two identical servers, one running a 32-bits kernel > and erlang, the other 64-bits. > And everything went fine, until I bumped into the "maximum heap size for > 32-bit machines", which I was unaware of: when a mnesia table exceeds 3GB > erlang crashes saying <<erlang eheap_alloc: Cannot allocate xxx bytes of > memory (of type "heap")>>. > In conclusion, for anyone wondering, I think I'm going 64. > Regards, > franz
> ________________________________________________________________ > erlang-questions (at) erlang.org mailing list. > See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html > To unsubscribe; mailto:erlang-questions-unsubscr...@erlang.org
-- --Hynek (Pichi) Vychodil
Analyze your data in minutes. Share your insights instantly. Thrill your boss. Be a data hero! Try GoodData now for free: www.gooddata.com
________________________________________________________________ erlang-questions (at) erlang.org mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html To unsubscribe; mailto:erlang-questions-unsubscr...@erlang.org
The 32 bit vs 64 bit dilemma is pretty old now. You can see 64bit taking generally more memory pretty much everywhere. I remember testing ubuntu 32 bit vs 64 bit and the 64 bit version used a good 1.5-1.7 times more memory on a vanilla install (1year ago). But as mentioned in the thread before, this can be mitigated to some extent if you manage the types properly at runtime, incurring the extra cost only on pointers and the extra alignment/padding required by them. Since my server is a fairly old amd 64bit with only 1.5gb ram, the extra memory I save from running in 32bit helps quite a bit. With 2gb+ ram, the line gets blurry and it isn't really usefull to stick with 32bit. Obviously, with 4gb+ you need 64 bit... Your choice should depend on your hardware and on the applications you run on it. Simple as that, profile and see. Depending on your data layout and what you do with it, you might or might not see a noticeable performance difference (by that I mean +- 5%). I believe, generally, 64bit to be a bit slower due to the extra memory cost generating more cache misses.
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 7:06 AM, Hynek Vychodil <hy...@gooddata.com> wrote: > If I remember right There was announced nice optimization of Erlang > process heap using 32 "pointers" on 64-bit architecture on SFO Erlang > Factory last year and I believe it is included in R14B version. Anyway > I'm not sure and didn't verify.
> On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 10:52 AM, franz <fan...@tiscali.it> wrote: > > I admit I was tempted by the 32-bits architecture. As I'm developing a > > mnesia-centric distributed application I thought that using 32-bits > machine > > would have reduced the ram consumption and the access speed. So I > developed > > some tests to be run on two identical servers, one running a 32-bits > kernel > > and erlang, the other 64-bits. > > And everything went fine, until I bumped into the "maximum heap size for > > 32-bit machines", which I was unaware of: when a mnesia table exceeds 3GB > > erlang crashes saying <<erlang eheap_alloc: Cannot allocate xxx bytes of > > memory (of type "heap")>>. > > In conclusion, for anyone wondering, I think I'm going 64. > > Regards, > > franz
> > ________________________________________________________________ > > erlang-questions (at) erlang.org mailing list. > > See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html > > To unsubscribe; mailto:erlang-questions-unsubscr...@erlang.org
> -- > --Hynek (Pichi) Vychodil
> Analyze your data in minutes. Share your insights instantly. Thrill > your boss. Be a data hero! > Try GoodData now for free: www.gooddata.com
> ________________________________________________________________ > erlang-questions (at) erlang.org mailing list. > See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html > To unsubscribe; mailto:erlang-questions-unsubscr...@erlang.org
