From: Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>
To: gnuoytr@rcn.com
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Completely un-tuned Postgresql benchmark results: SSD vs desktop HDD
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2010 00:49:06 -0400
Message-ID: <4C637D42.5040208@2ndquadrant.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100811205356.AHB77050@ms14.lnh.mail.rcn.net>
References: <20100811205356.AHB77050@ms14.lnh.mail.rcn.net>
gnuoytr@rcn.com wrote:
> Sufficiently bulletproof flash SSD exist and have for years, but their names are not well known (no one on this thread has named any)
The models perceived as bulletproof are the really dangerous ones to
deploy. First, people let their guard down and stop being as paranoid
as they should be when they use them. Second, it becomes much more
difficult for them to justify buying more than one of the uber-SSD.
That combination makes it easier to go back to having a single copy of
their data, and there's a really bad road to wander down.
The whole idea that kicked off this thread was to enable building
systems cheap enough to allow making more inexpensive copies of the
data. My systems at home for example follow this model to some degree.
There's not a single drive more expensive than $100 to be found here,
but everything important to me is sitting on four of them in two systems
within seconds after I save it. However, even here I've found it worth
dropping enough money for a real battery-backed write cache, to reduce
the odds of write corruption on the more important of the servers. Not
doing so would be a dangerously cheap decision. That's similar to how I
feel about SSDs right now too. You need them to be expensive enough
that corruption is unusual rather than expected after a crash--it's
ridiculous to not spend enough to get something that's not completely
broken by design--while not spending so much that you can't afford to
deploy many of them.
--
Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
greg@2ndQuadrant.com www.2ndQuadrant.us
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: greg@2ndquadrant.com, gnuoytr@rcn.com
Subject: Re: Completely un-tuned Postgresql benchmark results: SSD vs desktop HDD
In-Reply-To: <4C637D42.5040208@2ndquadrant.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox