RFC: Upgrade filter integer size to 64-bit

[Mathew Heard]

Is there even any userbase running bird on embedded hardware (that might be
adversely affected)?

Dn42 comes to mind. Perhaps? But realistically we aren't talking about much
of an increase surely?

Other than that I like 64bit only.

On Mon, 28 Mar 2022, 10:20 pm Douglas Fischer, <fischerdouglas at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I need to agree with Toke!
> "having Bird behave differently on different archs is bound to be
> incredibly confusing..."
>
> And, on the other hand, what would be the downside of having everything in
> 64?
> Using a little more memory than might be the minimum usable?
>
> This kind of care I see being taken for applications that run platforms
> with serious memory limitations.
> I don't see that this is BIRD's niche.
>
>
> In a real scenario of high demand using BIRD, how much memory would be
> "wasted"?
> In these real high demand scenarios, who uses 32bit these days?
>
> I would worry more about CPU cycles.
>
> Em sáb., 26 de mar. de 2022 às 19:19, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke at toke.dk>
> escreveu:
>
>> Maria Matejka <maria.matejka at nic.cz> writes:
>>
>> > Is there anybody who would try to convince me that I shouldn't make
>> > filter integers and route attribute integers both 64 bits wide?
>>
>> I think switching everything to 64-bits sounds quite sensible. Whatever
>> you do, please don't go with option 3, though, having Bird behave
>> differently on different archs is bound to be incredibly confusing... :)
>>
>> -Toke
>>
>
>
> --
> Douglas Fernando Fischer
> Engº de Controle e Automação
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://trubka.network.cz/pipermail/bird-users/attachments/20220328/4b5be15c/attachment.htm>