Re: Caching by Postgres
От | Alan Stange |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Caching by Postgres |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 430CC0AD.5040400@rentec.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Caching by Postgres (mark@mark.mielke.cc) |
Ответы |
Re: Caching by Postgres
Re: Caching by Postgres |
Список | pgsql-performance |
mark@mark.mielke.cc wrote: > So then we move on to what 64-bit is really useful for. Obviously, > there is the arithmetic. If you were previously doing 64-bit > arithmetic through software, you will notice an immediate speed > improvement when doing it through hardware instead. If you have > a program that is scanning memory in any way, it may benefit from > 64-bit instructions (for example - copying data 64-bit words at > a time instead of 32-bit words at a time). PostgreSQL might benefit > slightly from either of these, slightly balancing the performance > degradation of using more memory to store the pointers, and more > memory bandwidth the access the pointers. > At least on Sparc processors, v8 and newer, any double precision math (including longs) is performed with a single instruction, just like for a 32 bit datum. Loads and stores of 8 byte datums are also handled via a single instruction. The urban myth that 64bit math is different/better on a 64 bit processor is just that; yes, some lower end processors would emulate/trap those instructions but that an implementation detail, not architecture. I believe that this is all true for other RISC processors as well. The 64bit API on UltraSparcs does bring along some extra FP registers IIRC. > If, however, you happen to have a very large amount of physical memory > - more memory than is supported by a 32-bit system, but is supported > by your 64-bit system, then the operating system should be able to use > this additional physical memory to cache file system data pages, which > will benefit PostgreSQL if used with tables that are larger than the > memory supported by your 32-bit system, and which have queries which > require more pages than the memory supported by your 32-bit system to > be frequently accessed. If you have a huge database, with many clients > accessing the data, this would be a definate yes. With anything less, > it is a maybe, or a probably not. > Solaris, at least, provided support for far more than 4GB of physical memory on 32 bit kernels. A newer 64 bit kernel might be more efficient, but that's just because the time was taken to support large page sizes and more efficient data structures. It's nothing intrinsic to a 32 vs 64 bit kernel. -- Alan
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: