Re: Caching by Postgres
От | Alan Stange |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Caching by Postgres |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 430CE1F0.3080205@rentec.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Caching by Postgres (mark@mark.mielke.cc) |
Ответы |
Re: Caching by Postgres
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
mark@mark.mielke.cc wrote: > On Wed, Aug 24, 2005 at 02:47:09PM -0400, Alan Stange wrote: > >> 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. >> > > It isn't an urban myth that 64-bit math on a 64-bit processor is > faster, at least if done using registers. It definately is faster. > The older 32bit RISC processors do have 64 bit registers, ALUs and datapaths, and they are marketed toward high end scientific computing, and you're claiming that such a processor is slower than one which has the addition of 64 bit pointers added to it? As an example, an UltraSparc running a 32 bit kernel+application will have the same double precision floating point performance as one running a 64bit kernel+application (except for the additional FP registers in the 64bit API). For a function like daxpy, it's the exact same hardware running the exact same instructions! So why do you think the performance would be different? I believe the IBM Power processors also upped everything to double precision internally because of some details of the "multiply-add fused" instructions. It's been a few years since I taught H&P to CS undergrads, but I'm fairly sure the details are all the same for MIPS processors as well. -- Alan
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: