Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards?
| От | mark@mark.mielke.cc |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 20060613021627.GA4682@mark.mielke.cc обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>) |
| Ответы |
Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards?
|
| Список | pgsql-performance |
I've been trying to track this stuff - in fact, I'll likely be
switching from AMD32 to AMD64 in the next few weeks.
I believe I have a handle on the + vs - of 64-bit. It makes sense that
full 64-bit would be slower. At an extreme it halfs the amount of
available memory or doubles the required memory bandwidth, depending
on the work load.
Has anybody taken a look at PostgreSQL to ensure that it uses 32-bit
integers instead of 64-bit integers where only 32-bit is necessary?
32-bit offsets instead of 64-bit pointers? This sort of thing?
I haven't. I'm meaning to take a look. Within registers, 64-bit should
be equal speed to 32-bit. Outside the registers, it would make sense
to only deal with the lower 32-bits where 32-bits is all that is
required.
Cheers,
mark
--
mark@mielke.cc / markm@ncf.ca / markm@nortel.com __________________________
. . _ ._ . . .__ . . ._. .__ . . . .__ | Neighbourhood Coder
|\/| |_| |_| |/ |_ |\/| | |_ | |/ |_ |
| | | | | \ | \ |__ . | | .|. |__ |__ | \ |__ | Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them, one ring to bring them all
and in the darkness bind them...
http://mark.mielke.cc/
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: