Re: SSD performance

From: Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com>
To: david(at)lang(dot)hm
Cc: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: SSD performance
Date: 2009-01-25 07:26:44
Message-ID: Pine.GSO.4.64.0901250217420.25759@westnet.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Fri, 23 Jan 2009, david(at)lang(dot)hm wrote:

> take a look at this ram based drive, specificly look at the numbers here
> http://techreport.com/articles.x/16255/9
> they are about as much above the X25-e as the X25-e is above normal drives.

They're so close to having a killer product with that one. All they need
to do is make the backup to the CF card automatic once the battery backup
power drops low (but not so low there's not enough power to do said
backup) and it would actually be a reasonable solution. The whole
battery-backed cache approach is risky enough when the battery is expected
to last a day or two; with this product only giving 4 hours, it not hard
to imagine situations where you'd lose everything on there.

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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Finneid 2009-01-25 07:45:05 Re: strange index performance?
Previous Message Euler Taveira de Oliveira 2009-01-24 22:11:11 Re: "tablespace" for tranaction log?