| From: | Brad Nicholson <bnichols(at)ca(dot)afilias(dot)info> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Karl Denninger <karl(at)denninger(dot)net>, Laszlo Nagy <gandalf(at)shopzeus(dot)com>, pgsql-performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: SSD + RAID |
| Date: | 2009-11-13 19:24:16 |
| Message-ID: | 4AFDB260.10203@ca.afilias.info |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Greg Smith wrote:
> Karl Denninger wrote:
>> With the write cache off on these disks they still are huge wins for
>> very-heavy-read applications, which many are.
> Very read-heavy applications would do better to buy a ton of RAM
> instead and just make sure they populate from permanent media (say by
> reading everything in early at sequential rates to prime the cache).
> There is an extremely narrow use-case where SSDs are the right
> technology, and it's only in a subset even of read-heavy apps where
> they make sense.
Out of curiosity, what are those narrow use cases where you think SSD's
are the correct technology?
--
Brad Nicholson 416-673-4106
Database Administrator, Afilias Canada Corp.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Crooke | 2009-11-13 20:22:22 | Re: SSD + RAID |
| Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2009-11-13 18:57:28 | Re: SSD + RAID |