Re: High Mem Options

[Martin J. Bligh]

> Ah, if you are referring to a number from me, that was with 2.4 and
> that number seemed high to me at the time.  I don't believe that 10%
> *should* be the amount of degradation.  But I don't have current numbers
> (that I can share, anyway ;-) that prove anything less than that.
> 
> I expect that we'll be diving into this more over the next few months
> as we can generate some large workloads and find the cause of the
> degradation (and hopefully minimize it).

Would also be useful to measure the overhead on a machine with < 4Gb
of RAM ... otherwise you have two effects to deal with:

1. the PAE overhead.
2. The increase in RAM - more data to manage, and potential bounce-buffers.

M.