On Mon, 2003-10-06 at 01:43, Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
> Ron Johnson wrote:
> >>IMO they could be better machine for databases. Get a 64 bit linux kernel and
> >>run 32 bit postgresql on it. Should work like a charm..
> >
> >
> > Why not run 64-bit PG on the 64-bit kernel? A bunch of distros
> > are releasing support for the AMD64 this month.
>
> The best performance is by running 32 bit applications on 64 bit kernel/hardware
> , according to a migration guide by HP. The reasoning is using space optimally
Does HP have any AMD64 servers?
> Imagine, if every long in pg is 8byte that would be waste most of the times.
> However given a native 8 byte integer/float is available, there is no reason to
> use a 8 byte data type unless required.
From what I've read, longs are still 32-bit; it's only pointers
that have upped to 64-bit.
> Its about exploiting wide and fast bus of a 64bit machine in a most optimal
> fashion. I think except for kernel and glibc, nothing else requires 64 bit in
> general unless application insists on doing it's own caching.
In PG's case, if the app uses BIGINT a lot, then 64-bit PG should
be more efficient.
Besides, in 64-bit mode, the compilers get to use 2x as many GP
registers, which should increase performance.
> Of course benchmarks have the last words..:-)
As always.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ron Johnson, Jr. ron.l.johnson@cox.net
Jefferson, LA USA
PETA - People Eating Tasty Animals
