On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 1:26 PM, Charles Soto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
>
>
> On 6/23/08 11:59 AM, "Tim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 11:18 AM, Edward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> But the sad thing is Windows XP / Vista is still 32Bit. It doesn't
> >> recognize more then 3.x GB of Ram. 64Bit version is still premature and
> >> hardly OEM are adopting it. Hardware makers have yet to full jump on
> broad
> >> for 64 bit drivers.
> >
> >
> > false, both of them recognize well in excess of 4GB of ram.  What they
> CAN'T
> > do is address it for *ONE* process.  That's why applications like oracle
> > were quick to hop on the 64bit bandwagon, they actually need it.  I don't
> > know of too many consumer level apps besides maybe photoshop (and firefox
> ;)
> > ) that come anywhere near 4GB ram usage.
>
>
> While Edward is technically incorrect, the ceiling is still 4GB total
> physical memory:
>
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778.aspx
>
> Note that even though
>
> A 25% higher RAM ceiling is one thing, but it's a far cry from the 64-128GB
> the "enterprise target" Windows versions can use (yes, some of them are
> 32-bit but if you pay the extra $, you are allowed to use more RAM).  The
> 3GB per-process limit is the real factor.  But then again, who runs Oracle
> on Windows? :)
>
> Charles
> (ok, I have, but only for testing)
>
> _______________________________________________
> zfs-discuss mailing list
> zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
>


Read the fine print:

Limits on physical memory for 32-bit platforms also depend on the Physical
Address 
Extension<http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366796%28VS.85%29.aspx>(PAE),
which allows 32-bit Windows systems to use more than 4 GB of physical
memory.
PAE is enabled by default on XP after SP1, and all builds of vista.
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Reply via email to