From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
Cc: | mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc, Douglas McNaught <doug(at)mcnaught(dot)org>, Naz Gassiep <naz(at)mira(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL on 64 bit Linux |
Date: | 2006-08-21 14:09:56 |
Message-ID: | 11436.1156169396@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> writes:
> Can you think of any places at all where 64-bit would make a difference
> to processing? 64-bit gives you more memory, and on some x86 chips, more
> registers, but that's it.
It would be interesting to look into making int8 and float8 be
pass-by-value datatypes to save palloc overhead on machines where
Datum is going to be 8 bytes wide anyway. Of course this would
only help queries that use those datatypes extensively, and it
might be an insignificant savings anyhow :-(
For the most part though I think that the main advantage of 64-bit
for a database is the ability to address more memory. We've been
working slowly towards allowing PG to make better use of large
numbers of shared buffers, for instance.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | dror | 2006-08-21 14:11:11 | Re: Bug with initDB under windows 2003 |
Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2006-08-21 14:06:20 | Re: Unable to post to -patches (was: Visual C++ build files) |