Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DCAE650058 for ; Mon, 8 Dec 2008 16:37:00 -0400 (AST) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 14159-06 for ; Mon, 8 Dec 2008 16:36:54 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com (wa-out-1112.google.com [209.85.146.178]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D5D064FEFF for ; Mon, 8 Dec 2008 16:36:52 -0400 (AST) Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id j4so622051wah.19 for ; Mon, 08 Dec 2008 12:36:50 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=3+OaS7ZhZmuuFNh0O1MmgOTmKzCaT9fWwkJwPKNQrx0=; b=kqxFas52KJN556KSBjIpr0FkbHMIszhQ06eIC1aZ5N4mjTpCQFyzuB3IOlrTVAq5ka y3UDOcqgZbZOUqWsTLyonUUjSh/xH92LGfYgHT64l+FAEpBnD2NKfexF5SdnnfqRiPsu PKgsv6TQ2m6dZKu4adgk3vFaeHb93/mvnFC70= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=XC3ZeszOtUDGzdzn0WFcwka040HCz4/V6Q+P0D9+3bCwmHBSyvdcTJSp7qxn/5o2rR Nqy3uiDJlpSJgc0d/VyjewJMo+Z+4QCr/vfgOeeYeg2iWcmPJKh/A6yqYpfZknvf+tZO qLRaTt+tVXCX3g3TDsRAM7iaVn7v8pI8tngpY= Received: by 10.114.169.2 with SMTP id r2mr2636221wae.161.1228768289799; Mon, 08 Dec 2008 12:31:29 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.133.4 with HTTP; Mon, 8 Dec 2008 12:31:29 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2008 13:31:29 -0700 From: "Scott Marlowe" To: "Greg Smith" Subject: Re: Need help with 8.4 Performance Testing Cc: "Josh Berkus" , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <200812071138.01215.josh@agliodbs.com> X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=none X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200812/59 X-Sequence-Number: 32095 On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 1:15 PM, Greg Smith 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.