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


From: Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com>, pgsql-performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: SSD + RAID
Date: 2010-02-21 14:54:24
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-performance
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Agreed, thought I thought the problem was that SSDs lie about their
> cache flush like SATA drives do, or is there something I am missing?

There's exactly one case I can find[1] where this century's IDE
drives lied more than any other drive with a cache:

  Under 120GB Maxtor drives from late 2003 to early 2004.

and it's apparently been worked around for years.

Those drives claimed to support the "FLUSH_CACHE_EXT" feature (IDE
command 0xEA), but did not support sending 48-bit commands which
was needed to send the cache flushing command.

And for that case a workaround for Linux was quickly identified by
checking for *both* the support for 48-bit commands and support for the
flush cache extension[2].

Beyond those 2004 drive + 2003 kernel systems, I think most the rest
of such reports have been various misfeatures in some of Linux's
filesystems (like EXT3 that only wants to send drives cache-flushing
commands when inode change[3]) and linux software raid misfeatures....

...and ISTM those would affect SSDs the same way they'd affect SATA drives.


In response to


pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2010-02-21 18:44:26
Subject: Re: Auto Vacuum out of memory
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2010-02-21 14:10:43
Subject: Re: SSD + RAID

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group