From: | Alex Turner <armtuk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | PFC <lists(at)boutiquenumerique(dot)com> |
Cc: | John A Meinel <john(at)arbash-meinel(dot)com>, Postgresql Performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Cheap RAM disk? |
Date: | 2005-07-26 19:10:11 |
Message-ID: | 33c6269f0507261210400dff27@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Please see:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16820145309
and
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16820145416
The price of Reg ECC is not significantly higher than regular ram at
this point. Plus if you go with super fast 2-2-2-6 then it's actualy
more than good ol 2.5 Reg ECC.
Alex Turner
NetEconomist
On 7/26/05, PFC <lists(at)boutiquenumerique(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > I'm a little leary as it is definitely a version 1.0 product (it is
> > still using an FPGA as the controller, so they were obviously pushing to
> > get the card into production).
>
> Not necessarily. FPGA's have become a sensible choice now. My RME studio
> soundcard uses a big FPGA.
>
> The performance in the test doesn't look that good, though, but don't
> forget it was run under windows. For instance they get 77s to copy the
> Firefox source tree on their Athlon 64/raptor ; my Duron / 7200rpm ide
> drive does it in 30 seconds, but not with windows of course.
>
> However it doesnt' use ECC so... That's a pity, because they could have
> implemented ECC in "software" inside the chip, and have the benefits of
> error correction with normal, cheap RAM.
>
> Well; wait and see...
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alex Turner | 2005-07-26 19:11:42 | Re: Cheap RAM disk? |
Previous Message | Sven Willenberger | 2005-07-26 19:03:17 | Re: faster INSERT with possible pre-existing row? |