Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Intel's X25-M SSD

From: Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Intel's X25-M SSD
Date: 2008-09-08 23:12:24
Message-ID: Pine.GSO.4.64.0809081850050.5786@westnet.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
If like me you've been reading all the flash SSD drive reviews that come 
out, you might have also noticed that the performance on write-heavy 
workloads hasn't been too far ahead of traditional drives.  It's typically 
been hit or miss as to whether the SDD would really be all that much 
faster on a real OLTP-ish database workload, compared to a good 10k or 15k 
drive (WD's Velociraptor is the usual comparison drive).

That's over as of today:  http://techreport.com/articles.x/15433/9

You can see what I was talking about above in their Database graph: 
under heavy load, the Velociraptor pulls ahead of even a good performing 
flash product (Samsung's FlashSSD), and the latency curve on the next page 
shows something similar.  But the Intel drive is obviously a whole 
different class of SSD implementation altogether.  It's not clear yet if 
that's because of their NCQ support, or maybe the firmware just buffers 
writes better (they should have tested with NCQ disabled to nail that 
down).

With entry-level 64GB Flash drives now available for just under $200 ( 
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820227344 , price is 
so low because they're closing that model out for a better V2 product) 
this space is really getting interesting.

--
* Greg Smith gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Merlin MoncureDate: 2008-09-08 23:59:44
Subject: Re: Intel's X25-M SSD
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2008-09-08 22:35:24
Subject: Re: SAN and full_page_writes

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group