Re: SSD selection

¿Wizard Merlin?

>________________________________
> De: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>
>Para: David Boreham <david_list(at)boreham(dot)org>
>CC: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
>Enviado: Miércoles 16 de Mayo de 2012 13:53
>Asunto: Re: [PERFORM] SSD selection
>
>On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 12:45 PM, David Boreham <david_list(at)boreham(dot)org> wrote:
>> On 5/16/2012 11:01 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
>>>
>>> Although your assertion 100% supported by intel's marketing numbers,
>>> there are some contradicting numbers out there that show the drives
>>> offering pretty similar performance.  For example, look here:
>>> http://www.anandtech.com/show/4902/intel-ssd-710-200gb-review/4  and
>>> you can see that 4k aligned writes are giving quite similar results
>>> (14k iops) even though the 710 is only rated for 2700 iops while the
>>> 320 is rated for 21000 IOPS.  Other benchmarks also show similar
>>> results.
>>
>> Actually I said the same thing you're saying : that the two series will
>> deliver similar performance.
>>
>> The spec numbers however would be for worst case conditions (in the case of
>> the 710).
>> I'm not convinced that those tests were exercising the worst case part of
>> the envelope.
>
>Yeah -- you might be right -- their numbers are based on iometer which
>looks like it runs lower than other tests (see here:
>http://www.storagereview.com/intel_ssd_710_series_review_200gb).  I
>still find it interesting the 320 is spec'd so much higher though.  I
>guess I spoke to soon -- it looks it has to do with the life extending
>attributes of the drive.  Benchmarks are all over the place though.
>
>merlin
>
>--
>Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org)
>To make changes to your subscription:
>http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
>
>
>