From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | James Moe <jimoe(at)sohnen-moe(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Quad Xeon vs. Dual Itanium |
Date: | 2004-02-09 19:55:28 |
Message-ID: | 200402091955.i19JtSf15317@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
James Moe wrote:
> John Gibson wrote:
> >
> > Assuming similar memory and disk sub-systems, I am considering a Quad
> > Xeon system vs. a Dual Itanium for PostgreSQL. I believe that the
> > PostgreSQL code is written for 32 bit and not optimized for the 64 bit
> > Itanium cpu. That makes me think that the Xeon system would be a better
> > choice.
> >
> The Itanic hasn't lived up to its marketing hype. The comparisons
> I've seen between it and a 32-bit CPU show performance differences
> primarily due to clock speeds. So far the only advantage of 64 bits is
> address space. And because they are new, itanics cost much more.
> So with 2 itanics you get a slight improvement. With 4 xeons you get
> about 1.7x improvement over your current setup.
Here is an interesting article about the Opteron/Itanium issue:
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=14038
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | William Yu | 2004-02-09 20:14:45 | Re: Quad Xeon vs. Dual Itanium |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-02-09 19:23:00 | Re: Increasing Max Connections Mac OS 10.3 |