From: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Organization: PostgreSQL @ Sun
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards?
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 21:34:07 -0700
User-Agent: KMail/1.8.2
Cc: Leigh Dyer <leigh@eclinic.com.au>, Alex Turner <armtuk@gmail.com>,
	Steve Atkins <steve@blighty.com>
References: <1150151282.14661.42.camel@tigger>
	<33c6269f0606121926p15107d2fq9d395460269e2e53@mail.gmail.com>
	<448E25FB.1080902@eclinic.com.au>
In-Reply-To: <448E25FB.1080902@eclinic.com.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200606122134.07510.josh@agliodbs.com>

Folks,

FWIW, the applications where I did direct 32 / 64 comparison were 
a) several data warehouse tests, with databases > 100GB
b) computation-heavy applications (such as a complex calendaring app)

And, as others have pointed out, I wasn't comparing generics; I was comparing 
Athalon/Xeon to Opteron.  So it's quite possible that the improvements had 
nothing to do with going 64-bit and were because of other architecture 
improvements.

In which case, why was 64-bit such a big deal?

-- 
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
San Francisco