Re: SSD + RAID

From: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Brad Nicholson <bnichols(at)ca(dot)afilias(dot)info>, 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: 2009-11-17 16:36:26
Message-ID: b42b73150911170836t5b69f7edk1e9e7df67af1377b@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

2009/11/13 Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>:
> As far as what real-world apps have that profile, I like SSDs for small to
> medium web applications that have to be responsive, where the user shows up
> and wants their randomly distributed and uncached data with minimal latency.
> SSDs can also be used effectively as second-tier targeted storage for things
> that have a performance-critical but small and random bit as part of a
> larger design that doesn't have those characteristics; putting indexes on
> SSD can work out well for example (and there the write durability stuff
> isn't quite as critical, as you can always drop an index and rebuild if it
> gets corrupted).

I am right now talking to someone on postgresql irc who is measuring
15k iops from x25-e and no data loss following power plug test. I am
becoming increasingly suspicious that peter's results are not
representative: given that 90% of bonnie++ seeks are read only, the
math doesn't add up, and they contradict broadly published tests on
the internet. Has anybody independently verified the results?

merlin

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Brad Nicholson 2009-11-17 16:54:42 Re: SSD + RAID
Previous Message Tom Lane 2009-11-17 16:30:14 Re: Performance regression 8.3.8 -> 8.4.1 with NOT EXISTS