Message-ID: <4C4DD6AB.6000805@2ndquadrant.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 14:40:43 -0400
From: Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20100317)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Greg Spiegelberg <gspiegelberg@gmail.com>
CC: Yeb Havinga <yebhavinga@gmail.com>,
	Matthew Wakeling <matthew@flymine.org>, pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Testing Sandforce SSD
References: <4C4A9452.9070100@gmail.com>	<4C4B1F84.5030306@2ndquadrant.com>
	<4C4C83DF.3010703@gmail.com>	<4C4C8CCC.7080406@gmail.com>
	<alpine.DEB.2.00.1007261045470.20471@aragorn.flymine.org>
	<4C4DA982.5090308@2ndquadrant.com>
	<alpine.DEB.2.00.1007261632380.20471@aragorn.flymine.org>
	<4C4DB736.4020801@gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikSLLcUKdD=mZhN4MnSyUAvmgGqnmPCFKdmXbAJ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikSLLcUKdD=mZhN4MnSyUAvmgGqnmPCFKdmXbAJ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Greg Spiegelberg wrote:
> Speaking of the layers in-between, has this test been done with the 
> ext3 journal on a different device?  Maybe the purpose is wrong for 
> the SSD.  Use the SSD for the ext3 journal and the spindled drives for 
> filesystem?  

The main disk bottleneck on PostgreSQL databases are the random seeks 
for reading and writing to the main data blocks.  The journal 
information is practically noise in comparison--it barely matters 
because it's so much less difficult to keep up with.  This is why I 
don't really find ext2 interesting either.

-- 
Greg Smith  2ndQuadrant US  Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
greg@2ndQuadrant.com   www.2ndQuadrant.us