From: | "Scott Marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Greg Smith" <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Need help with 8.4 Performance Testing |
Date: | 2008-12-08 20:31:29 |
Message-ID: | dcc563d10812081231y6c71601am677ba828ff0b515e@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 1:15 PM, Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Dec 2008, Scott Marlowe wrote:
>
>> When I last used pgbench I wanted to test it with an extremely large
>> dataset, but it maxes out at -s 4xxx or so, and that's only in the
>> 40Gigabyte range. Is the limit raised for the pgbench included in
>> contrib in 8.4? I'm guessing it's an arbitrary limit.
>
> There's no artificial limit, just ones that result from things like integer
> overflow. I don't think has been an issue so far because pgbench becomes
> seek limited and stops producing interesting results once the database
> exceeds the sum of all available caching, which means you'd need more than
> 32GB of RAM in the system running pgbench before this is an issue. Which
> happens to be the largest size system I've ever ran it on...
Well, I have 32 Gig of ram and wanted to test it against a database
that was at least twice as big as memory. I'm not sure why you'd
consider the results uninteresting though, I'd think knowing how the
db will perform with a very large transactional store that is twice or
more the size of memory would be when it starts getting interesting.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | david | 2008-12-08 20:51:39 | Re: file system and raid performance |
Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2008-12-08 20:15:36 | Re: Need help with 8.4 Performance Testing |