On Tuesday 05 April 2011, Andrew Oliver wrote: > That is just the thing. Other things that should have been > similarly affected in the benchmark were not. Take a gander if > you would at some of the rest of that article...
HTTPD uses lots of pointers when handling per-dir and per-module configuration data. I agree with Bill that the 2x size increase in pointers is likely a major performance factor. Maybe the other workloads don't use so many pointers. They don't have a java benchmark AFAICS, which should be similarily affected. Or it is just bad luck that with 32bit, HTTPD's working set just fits into some cache while with 64bit, it doesn't. It would be interesting to see the same comparison with 2.3.11. There were some optimizations which should reduce CPU cache usage.
