Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 18:20:01 +0100
From: "Steinar H. Gunderson" <sgunderson@bigfoot.com>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Background writer configuration
Message-ID: <20060317172001.GA13758@uio.no>
Mail-Followup-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
References: <44181A11.EE98.0025.0@wicourts.gov>
	<20060316211523.73343cee.eugrid@fpm.kubsu.ru>
	<44198B3D.EE98.0025.0@wicourts.gov>
	<20060317152448.452e4854.eugrid@fpm.kubsu.ru>
	<6D84E9DE-E8AB-4C5D-8452-E141DBE9540D@blighty.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <6D84E9DE-E8AB-4C5D-8452-E141DBE9540D@blighty.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060126

On Fri, Mar 17, 2006 at 08:56:58AM -0800, Steve Atkins wrote:
> 64 bit binaries usually run marginally slower than 32 bit binaries.

This depends a bit on the application, and what you mean by "64 bit" (ie.
what architecture). Some specialized applications actually benefit from
having a 64-bit native data type (especially stuff working with a small
amount of bitfields -- think an anagram program), but Postgres is probably
not among them unless you do lots of arithmetic on bigints. amd64 has the
added benefit that you get twice as many registers available in 64-bit mode
(16 vs. 8 -- the benefit gets even bigger when you consider that a few of
those go to stack pointers etc.), so in some code you might get a few percent
extra from that, too.

/* Steinar */
-- 
Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/