|
I'm about to move a few v12.0.1 database servers from 32-bit Windows Server machines to 64-bit Windows Server 2012 R2 systems. Given the fact those databases are rather small (3 GB or smaller) and have run sufficiently fast with 32-bit caches (no /3GB boot option set, no AWE-cache, so at maximum 1.8 GB caches), I'm wondering whether to run SQL Anywhere as 32-bit or 64-bit engine. As all applications are still 32-bit and 32-bit SQL Anywhere engines are linked as LARGEADDRESSAWARE (allowing to make use of a full 4 GB address space under 64-bit Windows, so allowing a doubled cache size compared to the current situation), I would currently tend to stay with 32-bit engines. Q: Is there a compelling reason to use the 64-bit SQL Anywhere version on 64-bit hardware in such cases - or generally? (Yes, I know, an actual test would tell more, but I'm asking for a general recommendation.) |
|
I vote "yes"... when in Rome do as the Romans do.
My own (limited) tests reveal that for smaller loads (i.e. those not making use of caches larger than 3 GB), 32-bit database servers under 64-bit Windows may perform somewhat better, nevertheless the differences are small. But I had asked for a general rule, and so I'll take your advice:)
(11 Aug '15, 02:37)
Volker Barth
3
There's probably no compelling reason not to either. Given that:
I would suggest that riding the 64bit wave is looking better all the time. But that is just some random opinion ...
(18 Aug '15, 16:07)
Nick Elson S...
|
