John Gibson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Assuming similar memory and disk sub-systems, I am considering a Quad > Xeon system vs. a Dual Itanium for PostgreSQL. I believe that the > PostgreSQL code is written for 32 bit and not optimized for the 64 bit > Itanium cpu. That makes me think that the Xeon system would be a > better choice.
Postgres runs on many 64-bit systems, including UltraSPARC, MIPS, and Alpha, plus the Intel and AMD offerings. What makes you think it's 'not optimized'?
Maybe compilers aren't as good at doing Itanium yet?
John Gibson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: "I need to upgrade my dual Xeon PostgreSQL engine."
It just might be helpful if you could tell us "where it hurts".
Unless you need cutting edge floating point performance I doubt you'd want an Itanium (and even if you do, you might wish to consider powerpc as well).
Without any more info, I'd ask why not dual/quad Opteron? Even if you don't recompile or wait for better compilers or use 64 bit such a system would probably run faster than your dual Xeons.
---
http://www.infoworld.com/article/04/01/30/05FElinux_2.html
"Tests were run on three separate hardware platforms: Intel Xeon (x86), Intel Itanium (IA-64), and AMD Opteron (x86_64). The x86 tests were conducted on an IBM eServer x335 1U rack-mount server with dual 3.06GHz P4 Xeon processors and 2GB of RAM. The Itanium tests were run on an IBM eServer x450 3U rack-mount server with dual 1.5GHz Itanium2 processors and 2GB of RAM. And the Opteron tests were run on a Newisys 4300 3U rack-mount server with dual 2.2GHz Opteron 848 processors and 2GB of RAM. "
Summary: Dual Itanium slower than Xeon in many tests, Opteron fastest in most tests.
---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
