Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards?

From: David Wheeler <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Alex Turner" <armtuk(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Steve Atkins" <steve(at)blighty(dot)com>, "Pgsql-Performance ((E-mail))" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards?
Date: 2006-06-13 03:00:37
Message-ID: 6B4AA0AB-D851-4E60-B072-5B85C8EB4829@kineticode.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Jun 12, 2006, at 19:44, Tom Lane wrote:

> (Personally, if I'd designed it, the libraries would actually live in
> /usr/lib32 and /usr/lib64, and /usr/lib would be a symlink to
> whichever
> you needed it to be at the moment. Likewise for /usr/bin.)

/me nominates Tom to create a Linux distribution.

:-)

David

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2006-06-13 04:34:07 Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards?
Previous Message Luke Lonergan 2006-06-13 02:57:32 Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards?