Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-3.hub.org [200.46.204.243]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A35D46326C0 for ; Sat, 24 Jul 2010 18:20:59 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.243]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 05518-01 for ; Sat, 24 Jul 2010 21:20:50 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-ew0-f46.google.com (mail-ew0-f46.google.com [209.85.215.46]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E57C6324C6 for ; Sat, 24 Jul 2010 18:20:51 -0300 (ADT) Received: by ewy23 with SMTP id 23so499896ewy.19 for ; Sat, 24 Jul 2010 14:20:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=i5St4mubmPoGVz4K+gJ4DOtWb4BvH5tIGAJi8Bu6pKk=; b=sLl29YVYXJ8eH8SPe8iItqWmD0cI/nDEenbT9aG9myhBT998DXPfRQDU3bfw/wqRRA QvGRYmt2UbNOfGTZlpB2y3CcB+TlmD4sEYgSJ/UiflQvsamt669c7qxHqTXpABSWMErz 8jvtYuSjNJioT3HsHxjdDXxZ4nfAJxoTettDg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=rpwrOldeRzcX44Bhu1BuSIJeuHsaTdr87/rPMvJ2lrz0pa7D1jNcx8cp0fAdb2YPgj bo6mIzxI8I3Fcewe/G4po5txvh1tSvdvhfJ7qGrHN2QiRi+TiI2rzbhAYrBcomnR5Q80 v4vP1Yz/vnNFY3/IbHBsSs5AjixSh3gvfkxn8= Received: by 10.213.36.18 with SMTP id r18mr2037232ebd.74.1280006449464; Sat, 24 Jul 2010 14:20:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [0.0.0.0] (5357DA75.cable.casema.nl [83.87.218.117]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id v8sm2734966eeh.14.2010.07.24.14.20.48 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sat, 24 Jul 2010 14:20:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4C4B5984.4010705@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 24 Jul 2010 23:22:12 +0200 From: Yeb Havinga User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Greg Smith CC: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Testing Sandforce SSD References: <4C4A9452.9070100@gmail.com> <4C4B1F84.5030306@2ndquadrant.com> <4C4B43DA.90201@gmail.com> <4C4B4512.2060007@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4C4B4512.2060007@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201007/363 X-Sequence-Number: 39752 Yeb Havinga wrote: > Yeb Havinga wrote: >> diskchecker: running 37 sec, 4.47% coverage of 500 MB (1468 writes; >> 39/s) >> Total errors: 0 >> >> :-) > OTOH, I now notice the 39 write /s .. If that means ~ 39 tps... bummer. When playing with it a bit more, I couldn't get the test_file to be created in the right place on the test system. It turns out I had the diskchecker config switched and 39 write/s was the speed of the not-rebooted system, sorry. I did several diskchecker.pl tests this time with the testfile on the SSD, none of the tests have returned an error :-) Writes/s start low but quickly converge to a number in the range of 1200 to 1800. The writes diskchecker does are 16kB writes. Making this 4kB writes does not increase writes/s. 32kB seems a little less, 64kB is about two third of initial writes/s and 128kB is half. So no BBU speeds here for writes, but still ~ factor 10 improvement of iops for a rotating SATA disk. regards, Yeb Havinga PS: hdparm showed write cache was on. I did tests with both ext2 and xfs, where xfs tests I did with both barrier and nobarrier.