On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 8:20 AM, Peter Geoghegan
<peter.geoghegan86@gmail.com> wrote:
> Actually, there is a 64-bit port for windows now. I don't think I
> misrepresented Magnus - the post suggested that the then-lack of a
> 64-bit windows port wasn't a pressing issue, and that various
> technical considerations *partially* justified there not being one at
> the time (the word size of binaries, and more importantly PG's
> architecture). It's an assessment that I agreed with.
Also there was (is?) the issue that the pg / shared memory system used
on windows is apparently quite inefficient at using large amounts of
memory, so there was no pressing need there for 64 bitness either.