I'm leading some developements here on my company using big amounts of javascript/DOM manipulation/AJAX and I can say IE7 beta needs far less work than IE6 cause it's more DOM/CSS compliant but anyway the more javascript you make the more browser detection/dedicated code you need, no matter if it's AJAX/DHTML/Whatever you want.
I think it's something that we all must have crystal clear, both new x86-64 series are not full 64-bit CPUs, as x86 based are not CISC nor RISC and even not fully 32 bits processors.
New x86-64/em64t cores have 64 bit addressing and for doing so they have 64-bit GPRs but all other registers and operand sizes are still 32-bits.
So from where did the scientific benchmark performance gain come?
Well, FP units on pentium/athlon chips are 64bits capable(32-bit native) since MMX/3DNOW instruction sets and 128bit capable(64-bit native) since SSE2/3DNOW2 instruction sets. The problem with 128bit instructions is that L1 to L2 bus is only 128-bit(4 words as pentium/athlon caches are 4-way associative) wide so every instruction needed 2 cache accesses if operands where not in registers nor L1. With new 64-bit address spaces the whole memory hierarchy has been upgraded, and thus the 4-way cache can provide 4 long(64-bit) words so new ATC(advanced transfer caches) can provide 256-bit bus wide(only in 64-bit mode, not in legacy mode) and thus both operands can be accessed same time. Having a 20(aprox) cycles access to L2 you can easily see the resulting speed-up.
I've been long time working with Postgres, MySQL and Oracle and I really think both 3 are in different "market" sectors:
- MySQL is the best in it's zone, it's fast, easy to use and reliable but IMHO it's not (still) a full RBDMS, what it's not a bad thing at all. It does the work it is supposed to do and does it better than nobody.
- PostgreSQL is a wonderful RBDMS but not intended for OLTP-only-non critical data as MySQL is nor intended for the big markets. If there a real good point in Postgres (aside from being a free RDBMS) is that it's rock-solid even more than Oracle (from my own experience). The bad point of postgres is performance with big databases and/or big boxes.
- Oracle is not for gaming, not intended for small or medium DBs or boxes, hard to admin and not easy to tune, also expensive but when the big boxes come and the big dbs are there it clearly outperforms postgres.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm leading some developements here on my company using big amounts of javascript/DOM manipulation/AJAX and I can say IE7 beta needs far less work than IE6 cause it's more DOM/CSS compliant but anyway the more javascript you make the more browser detection/dedicated code you need, no matter if it's AJAX/DHTML/Whatever you want.
I think it's something that we all must have crystal clear, both new x86-64 series are not full 64-bit CPUs, as x86 based are not CISC nor RISC and even not fully 32 bits processors.
New x86-64/em64t cores have 64 bit addressing and for doing so they have 64-bit GPRs but all other registers and operand sizes are still 32-bits.
So from where did the scientific benchmark performance gain come?
Well, FP units on pentium/athlon chips are 64bits capable(32-bit native) since MMX/3DNOW instruction sets and 128bit capable(64-bit native) since SSE2/3DNOW2 instruction sets. The problem with 128bit instructions is that L1 to L2 bus is only 128-bit(4 words as pentium/athlon caches are 4-way associative) wide so every instruction needed 2 cache accesses if operands where not in registers nor L1. With new 64-bit address spaces the whole memory hierarchy has been upgraded, and thus the 4-way cache can provide 4 long(64-bit) words so new ATC(advanced transfer caches) can provide 256-bit bus wide(only in 64-bit mode, not in legacy mode) and thus both operands can be accessed same time.
Having a 20(aprox) cycles access to L2 you can easily see the resulting speed-up.
I've been long time working with Postgres, MySQL and Oracle and I really think both 3 are in different "market" sectors: - MySQL is the best in it's zone, it's fast, easy to use and reliable but IMHO it's not (still) a full RBDMS, what it's not a bad thing at all. It does the work it is supposed to do and does it better than nobody. - PostgreSQL is a wonderful RBDMS but not intended for OLTP-only-non critical data as MySQL is nor intended for the big markets. If there a real good point in Postgres (aside from being a free RDBMS) is that it's rock-solid even more than Oracle (from my own experience). The bad point of postgres is performance with big databases and/or big boxes. - Oracle is not for gaming, not intended for small or medium DBs or boxes, hard to admin and not easy to tune, also expensive but when the big boxes come and the big dbs are there it clearly outperforms postgres.