Jyri Virkki wrote: > Matt Ingenthron wrote: > >> I believe we'll need to deliver both, and there are probably still a >> number of reasons (for now) that one may choose to run 32-bit even on a >> system with a 64-bit ISA, which means there has to be a switch somewhere >> to pick what one wants to run. >> > > As you say, I doubt 64bit is universally always the right answer for > every conceivable scenario, so there needs to be some sort of switch. > > So the question becomes what should be the out-of-box default. Barring > compelling arguments otherwise, I'll always argue for consistency > (which seems to be the direction the proposal is going). > > Peter mentioned better performance on x86 which may well be a > compelling argument depending on the details. The db team should > research this so there's enough data to declare it one way or the > other. >
Agreed, and I apologize for hijacking this thread into a general 32/64-bit concern in my last email. We should have some data to work with, and from history with MySQL, I think this is available/easy to obtain. Anything that is usually deployed in a read-mostly fashion and can have a large memory cache is pretty easy to make an argument for. Regarding consistency though, it could be entirely appropriate for MySQL to default to 64-bit on capable platforms, while other parts of the stack deliver in 32-bit by default as they currently do, right? This is predicated on having data on which to base this decision though. - Matt -- Matt Ingenthron - Web Infrastructure Solutions Architect Sun Microsystems, Inc. - Global Systems Practice http://blogs.sun.com/mingenthron/ email: matt.ingenthron at sun.com Phone: 310-242-6439
