better performance with 32 bit ! why?
novosirj at umdnj.edu
Tue Jun 28 17:32:04 UTC 2011
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 06/28/2011 12:30 PM, David Sparro wrote:
> On 6/28/2011 11:15 AM, iharrathi.ext at orange-ftgroup.com wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> I'm testing the same version of bind 9.4-ESV-R4-P1 on two server, one is
>> a 32 bit (on which i have a redhat 32 bit) and the second a 64 bit
>> server on which i have a redhat 64 bit.
>> on the 32 bit i reach 70000 qps but on the 64 bit i only reach 50000 qps
>> (using resperf) and also with tcpreplay.
>> Is it normal that bind when compiled and installed on a 32 bit server
>> have better performance than bind when compiled and installed on a 64
>> bit server.
>> the only différence between the two server is 64 bit vs 32 bit ( same
>> RAM, same Disk, same NIC,...) and CPU is better on the 64 bit (2 Intel
>> E5310 quad-core 1.6Ghz) than the 32 bit(2 Intel Xeon duad-core 2.33Ghz).
> The 32 bit rig is faster (2.33Ghz).
My understanding is that 64-bit is NOT faster in most cases, and only
makes some things possible (addressing large amounts of memory is one
stand-out) that are not possible with 32-bit. If bind is not going to be
using over 4GB of RAM by itself, my understanding is that running 64-bit
will merely add overhead. I realize that is a pretty big generalization,
so feel free to correct me if you know better.
- ---- _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _
|Y#| | | |\/| | \ |\ | | |Ryan Novosielski - Sr. Systems Programmer
|$&| |__| | | |__/ | \| _| |novosirj at umdnj.edu - 973/972.0922 (2-0922)
\__/ Univ. of Med. and Dent.|IST/CST-Academic Svcs. - ADMC 450, Newark
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 301 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the bind-users