Re: Quad Xeon vs. Dual Itanium

From: Lincoln Yeoh <lyeoh(at)pop(dot)jaring(dot)my>
To: Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Quad Xeon vs. Dual Itanium
Date: 2004-02-13 14:44:55
Message-ID: 5.2.1.1.1.20040213204143.025c05a8@mbox.jaring.my
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Hmm, do you mean 64 bit postgresql on Solaris-Sparc isn't significantly
better performance-wise than 32 bit postgresql on Solaris-Sparc?

Interesting.

How about very large databases?

At 07:17 AM 2/13/2004 -0500, Andrew Sullivan wrote:

>On Mon, Feb 09, 2004 at 12:46:58PM -0500, Christopher Browne wrote:
> > Lots of people have been running it on 64 bit systems for _years_ now.
> > The Digital Alpha architecture, for instance, was introduced in the
> > 1992, and Sun UltraSPARC in 1995. PostgreSQL has been running well on
> > these sorts of systems for a lot of years now.
>
>But actually, there are problems with using postgres as a 64 bit
>application on Solaris. It works, and it's reliable, but I've never
>seen any evidence that it helps anything (and I've looked plenty).
>
>A
>
>--
>Andrew Sullivan | ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca
>In the future this spectacle of the middle classes shocking the avant-
>garde will probably become the textbook definition of Postmodernism.
> --Brad Holland
>
>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
> joining column's datatypes do not match

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Froggy / Froggy Corp. 2004-02-13 15:30:03 Too much CPU usage
Previous Message Stephen Howard 2004-02-13 14:37:43 Re: book for postgresql