On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 8:20 AM, Peter Geoghegan <peter.geoghegan86@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Actually, there is a 64-bit port for windows now. I don't think I > misrepresented Magnus - the post suggested that the then-lack of a > 64-bit windows port wasn't a pressing issue, and that various > technical considerations *partially* justified there not being one at > the time (the word size of binaries, and more importantly PG's > architecture). It's an assessment that I agreed with. Also there was (is?) the issue that the pg / shared memory system used on windows is apparently quite inefficient at using large amounts of memory, so there was no pressing need there for 64 bitness either. -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
