Re: Server recommendations

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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  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.