Re: SSD + RAID

From: Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com>, pgsql-performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: SSD + RAID
Date: 2010-02-21 14:54:24
Message-ID: 4B814920.1040204@cheapcomplexdevices.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Agreed, thought I thought the problem was that SSDs lie about their
> cache flush like SATA drives do, or is there something I am missing?

There's exactly one case I can find[1] where this century's IDE
drives lied more than any other drive with a cache:

Under 120GB Maxtor drives from late 2003 to early 2004.

and it's apparently been worked around for years.

Those drives claimed to support the "FLUSH_CACHE_EXT" feature (IDE
command 0xEA), but did not support sending 48-bit commands which
was needed to send the cache flushing command.

And for that case a workaround for Linux was quickly identified by
checking for *both* the support for 48-bit commands and support for the
flush cache extension[2].

Beyond those 2004 drive + 2003 kernel systems, I think most the rest
of such reports have been various misfeatures in some of Linux's
filesystems (like EXT3 that only wants to send drives cache-flushing
commands when inode change[3]) and linux software raid misfeatures....

...and ISTM those would affect SSDs the same way they'd affect SATA drives.

[1] http://lkml.org/lkml/2004/5/12/132
[2] http://lkml.org/lkml/2004/5/12/200
[3] http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel(at)vger(dot)kernel(dot)org/msg272253.html

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2010-02-21 18:44:26 Re: Auto Vacuum out of memory
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2010-02-21 14:10:43 Re: SSD + RAID