| From: | Yeb Havinga <yebhavinga(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Testing Sandforce SSD |
| Date: | 2010-07-28 13:45:23 |
| Message-ID: | 4C503473.5080105@gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Michael Stone wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 03:23:20PM -0600, Greg Spiegelberg wrote:
>> I know I'm talking development now but is there a case for a pg_xlog
>> block
>> device to remove the file system overhead and guaranteeing your data is
>> written sequentially every time?
>
> If you dedicate a partition to xlog, you already get that in practice
> with no extra devlopment.
Due to the LBA remapping of the SSD, I'm not sure of putting files that
are sequentially written in a different partition (together with e.g.
tables) would make a difference: in the end the SSD will have a set new
blocks in it's buffer and somehow arrange them into sets of 128KB of
256KB writes for the flash chips. See also
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2899/2
But I ran out of ideas to test, so I'm going to test it anyway.
regards,
Yeb Havinga
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Yeb Havinga | 2010-07-28 15:18:27 | Re: Testing Sandforce SSD |
| Previous Message | Michael Stone | 2010-07-28 12:24:00 | Re: Testing Sandforce SSD |