Re: Quad Xeon vs. Dual Itanium

From: "Rob Sell" <lists(at)facnd(dot)com>
To: <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Quad Xeon vs. Dual Itanium
Date: 2004-02-09 17:03:15
Message-ID: 20040209170322.071302B30@mail.facnd.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

-----Original Message-----
From: pgsql-general-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
[mailto:pgsql-general-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of Doug McNaught
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 10:44 AM
To: John Gibson
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Quad Xeon vs. Dual Itanium

John Gibson <gib(at)edgate(dot)com> writes:

> Assuming similar memory and disk sub-systems, I am considering a Quad
> Xeon system vs. a Dual Itanium for PostgreSQL. I believe that the
> PostgreSQL code is written for 32 bit and not optimized for the 64 bit
> Itanium cpu. That makes me think that the Xeon system would be a
> better choice.

Postgres runs on many 64-bit systems, including UltraSPARC, MIPS, and
Alpha, plus the Intel and AMD offerings. What makes you think it's
'not optimized'?

-Doug
-------------------------

The only way I can see that its not optimized for 64 bit would be to use
32bit binaries on it, and the only way that can even happen is on the new
amd chips I believe, or will itanium run 32bit apps also?

Rob

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ed L. 2004-02-09 17:14:45 Re: setting default value by "trigger"
Previous Message Andy Grove 2004-02-09 16:52:42 [ANN] FireStorm/DAO now fully supports Postgres