From: | Shridhar Daithankar <shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in> |
---|---|
To: | Ron Johnson <ron(dot)l(dot)johnson(at)cox(dot)net> |
Cc: | PgSQL General ML <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Server recommendations |
Date: | 2003-10-06 06:43:33 |
Message-ID: | 3F810F15.6090901@persistent.co.in |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
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
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.
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.
Of course benchmarks have the last words..:-)
Shridhar
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Shridhar Daithankar | 2003-10-06 06:47:51 | Re: PITR (was Re: Type of application that use PostgreSQL) |
Previous Message | Shridhar Daithankar | 2003-10-06 06:11:34 | Re: Postgres low end processing. |