List:General Discussion« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:Tim Cutts Date:May 14 2004 8:01am
Subject:Re: InnoDB filesystem
View as plain text  
On 14 May 2004, at 1:14 am, Dathan Vance Pattishall wrote:

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jeremy Zawodny [mailto:Jeremy@stripped]
>> Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2004 4:03 PM
>> To: Dathan Vance Pattishall
>> Cc: 'Tim Cutts'; 'MySQL List'
>> Subject: Re: InnoDB filesystem
>> On Thu, May 13, 2004 at 04:51:27PM -0700, Dathan Vance Pattishall 
>> wrote:
>> I think that the problem is that it's *not* a 64 bit OS.  It's just an
>> Intel 32bit box with > 4GB of memory.  And sine MySQL doesn't do PAE,
>> it'll never see that extra memory.
> Intel box with > 4GB? It is possible with a patch like hugemem in 
> Linux but
> 4GB should only be used 2^32 = 4GB. - The hugemem patch for instance 
> allows
> you to use all 16 GB but at a performance penalty.

I have 168 32-bit machines (IBM HS20 blades) which can take 8GB RAM 
each, although we don't have them configured with that much.  So there 
are plenty of these machines available.

I tend to agree though, that for MySQL, if you want lots of memory its 
better to go for a 64-bit platform.  We've been using Alphas and Tru64 
for MySQL databases for years.


InnoDB filesystemJFL13 May
  • Re: InnoDB filesystemJeremy Zawodny13 May
    • Re: InnoDB filesystemJFL13 May
      • Re: InnoDB filesystemDan Nelson13 May
        • Re: InnoDB filesystemTim Cutts13 May
          • RE: InnoDB filesystemDathan Vance Pattishall14 May
            • Re: InnoDB filesystemJeremy Zawodny14 May
              • RE: InnoDB filesystemDathan Vance Pattishall14 May
                • Re: InnoDB filesystemTim Cutts14 May
              • Re: InnoDB filesystemChris Nolan14 May
                • Re: InnoDB filesystemJeremy Zawodny14 May