| From: | Ben Chobot <bench(at)silentmedia(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andy <angelflow(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "wozniak(at)lanl(dot)gov" <wozniak(at)lanl(dot)gov>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>, John W Strange <john(dot)w(dot)strange(at)jpmchase(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: concurrent IO in postgres? |
| Date: | 2010-12-23 21:22:32 |
| Message-ID: | E1CE68BE-D9AD-4508-BD54-CD6E085047AB@silentmedia.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Dec 23, 2010, at 11:58 AM, Andy wrote:
>
> Somewhat tangential to the current topics, I've heard that FusionIO uses internal cache and hence is not crash-safe, and if the cache is turned off performance will take a big hit. Is that your experience?
It does use an internal cache, but it also has onboard battery power. The driver needs to put its house in order when restarting after an unclean shutdown, however, and that can take up to 30 minutes per card.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | John Cagle | 2010-12-24 00:49:16 | Re: concurrent IO in postgres? |
| Previous Message | Ben | 2010-12-23 21:01:48 | Re: encourging bitmap AND |