| From: | Hans-Jürgen Schönig <postgres(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Koichi Suzuki <koichi(at)intellilink(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org, Satoshi Nagayasu <nagayasus(at)nttdata(dot)co(dot)jp>, ikubo(at)intellilink(dot)co(dot)jp, yasunaga <yasunaga(dot)hisato(at)soft(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <root(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>, sakata(dot)tetsuo(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp, "T(dot)Honishi" <honishi(dot)takashi(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Subject: | Re: A couple of patches for PostgreSQL 64bit support |
| Date: | 2005-07-07 16:23:40 |
| Message-ID: | 42CD570C.3000103@cybertec.at |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Koichi Suzuki <koichi(at)intellilink(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
>
>>Here're a couple of patches for PostgreSQL 64bit support. There're just
>>two extension to 64bit, size of shared memory and transaction ID.
>
>
> I asked originally for some experimental evidence showing any value
> in having more than 2Gb of shared buffers. In the absence of any
> convincing demonstration, I'm not very inclined to worry about whether
> we can handle wider-than-int shared memory size.
There is some practical evidence. Recently the number of large boxes in
the field is almost growing exponentially. Today I have heard somebody
say "this box has 'just 4 gig of ram' ".
On large installations we have already seen problems with too small
caches (= 2gb).
Surprisingly this has turned out to be a quite important issue in the
field. Tests have shown that the cache provided by the OS is a lot worse
for the database.
64-bit XIDs seem to be an overkill - the only practical impact I can see
is an even larger tuple header (this can be an issue on large boxes too
- at least compared to Oracle).
Best regards,
Hans
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-07-07 16:35:36 | Re: A couple of patches for PostgreSQL 64bit support |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2005-07-07 16:22:48 | Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-07-07 16:35:36 | Re: A couple of patches for PostgreSQL 64bit support |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-07-07 13:51:11 | Re: A couple of patches for PostgreSQL 64bit support |