Click here to monitor SSC
SQLServerCentral is supported by Red Gate Software Ltd.
 
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in
 
 
 
        
Home       Members    Calendar    Who's On


Add to briefcase 123»»»

Still 32 Expand / Collapse
Author
Message
Posted Saturday, January 26, 2013 1:32 PM


SSC-Dedicated

SSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-Dedicated

Group: Administrators
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 12:34 PM
Points: 31,181, Visits: 15,626
Comments posted to this topic are about the item Still 32






Follow me on Twitter: @way0utwest

Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Post #1412074
Posted Sunday, January 27, 2013 9:51 PM


Old Hand

Old HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld Hand

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, October 7, 2014 1:15 PM
Points: 388, Visits: 1,044
Excellent points, Steve,

Each time I'm reminded of the decision to not build 64-bit Excel drivers I think, "Think of all the money they saved!" Meanwhile, I've seen data integration shops struggle with the overhead of learning to execute SSIS in 32-bit mode to accommodate that decision.

:{\


Andy Leonard
CSO, Linchpin People
Follow me on Twitter: @AndyLeonard
Post #1412173
Posted Monday, January 28, 2013 6:15 AM
Say Hey Kid

Say Hey KidSay Hey KidSay Hey KidSay Hey KidSay Hey KidSay Hey KidSay Hey KidSay Hey Kid

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 11:46 AM
Points: 685, Visits: 1,723
We've had two plus decades of sales pressure and promotion from Redmond and others "encouraging" us to upgrade. After a while users realize that the newer versions of software aren't always necessary or anymore useful than the older ones and in some cases, (Vista, Windows 8, etc...), they can be confusing and costly to implement.
Post #1412389
Posted Monday, January 28, 2013 6:22 AM


SSC-Forever

SSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-Forever

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 8:19 AM
Points: 40,208, Visits: 36,617
I've been running 64 bit on my home machine for over 5 years now. Some software is installed 64 bit, most as 32 bit. Minimal problems, most were VPN clients that didn't have 64-bit drivers (hello virtual machine).

I'd honestly recommend 64 bit OS without exception. SQL too, unless there's a really, really good reason not to.




Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server 2008, MVP
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability

We walk in the dark places no others will enter
We stand on the bridge and no one may pass

Post #1412393
Posted Monday, January 28, 2013 6:54 AM


Ten Centuries

Ten CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen Centuries

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 4:34 AM
Points: 1,049, Visits: 3,011
I was listening to a presentation recently and the presenter talked about some of the restrictions in working with 32 bit SQL Server on 64 bit Windows hosts. Another person joked that any companies still running 32 bit software were way behind the times. I heard a comment that surely everyone runs 64 bit hardware these days, don't they?

I can picture the scene perfectly in my mind's eye. Throwaway comments from techies being arrogant or smug, or simply making unsafe assumptions. None of those are attributes to fill me with confidence in those techies' abilities.

I agree that 64 bit is a good and perfectly safe choice, but there are always edge cases. Just because something's a good choice if you have a blank canvas isn't sufficient justification for all other setups to be updated. Technical excellence and fitness for business purpose are not always the same thing.


Semper in excretia, sumus solum profundum variat
Post #1412408
Posted Monday, January 28, 2013 7:21 AM


SSCrazy

SSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazy

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 6:41 AM
Points: 2,109, Visits: 2,121
Good editorial Steve!

I vaguely remember a similar debate, many years ago, regarding 16 or 32 bit. I guess the more things change the more they stay the same.

There may be a few places where 16 bit is still running fine but for the most part it has been replaced. If history is any indicator the same will be true for 32 bit. As new hardware and software comes out 64 bit will slowly become the standard and there will be fewer and fewer places where 32 bit continues to run fine.

It will be interesting to see what kind of breakthrough will be discovered to replace 64 bit...

Enjoy!
Post #1412425
Posted Monday, January 28, 2013 7:26 AM


Ten Centuries

Ten CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen Centuries

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, September 16, 2014 2:03 PM
Points: 1,334, Visits: 3,069
We have one legacy 32-Bit SQL box. The rest are all 64-Bit installs. It's our standard install simply because 64-bit architecture blows right past the 3 GB barrier and can theoretically address up to 18 Exabytes (18 billion GB) of system memory, not that you would ever have that much memory. Plus, 64-bit computers are much faster and more efficient than 32-bit computers because the processor can swallow and digest larger chunks of data with each and every bite. So, they are the hands down choice over 32-bit systems. Anyway, that architecture is extremely dated and is dying a very fast death.

"Technology is a weird thing. It brings you great gifts with one hand, and it stabs you in the back with the other. ..."
Post #1412430
Posted Monday, January 28, 2013 7:49 AM
Grasshopper

GrasshopperGrasshopperGrasshopperGrasshopperGrasshopperGrasshopperGrasshopperGrasshopper

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, September 29, 2014 9:05 AM
Points: 22, Visits: 155
We run 64 bit for most new builds with one exception, some old finical reporting software that is tied to our ERP system requires 32 bit. This software is no longer being developed or upgraded by the vendor. We cannot switch to another tool without writing it ourselves and that will not happen because the ERP system will be upgraded to a different vendor soon. …by soon I mean they will start working on the upgrade soon. So, long story short, we still have at least 2 years on 32 bit for this dusty old software.
Post #1412443
Posted Monday, January 28, 2013 9:10 AM
SSC Veteran

SSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC Veteran

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 8:27 AM
Points: 227, Visits: 2,174
There are always people who will be penny wise and pound foolish. Servers need to be replaced, so why not take advantage of more powerful hardware? Not everybody wants to be bleeding edge, but certainly no need to wait more than 1-2 years. Also, people get paid with real money. So it's a waste of time and money to spend endless time working of performance issues that could be solved with hardware that costs less than the salary for all those involved. The business would be better served if said individuals were working on new systems.

The vendor app issue is the one thing that can be really hard to get around. I remember a few times over the years when the business was perfectly happy with the older version that hadn't been certified newer versions of just about everything.
Post #1412493
Posted Monday, January 28, 2013 9:36 AM


SSCarpal Tunnel

SSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal Tunnel

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, October 1, 2014 10:48 AM
Points: 4,126, Visits: 3,427
I am surprised that no one mentioned the 2 GB (or 3 GB under Win7) memory limit. In my experience, need for more memory is a pretty good reason to go to 64 bits.
Post #1412509
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

Add to briefcase 123»»»

Permissions Expand / Collapse