Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-3.hub.org [200.46.204.243]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E39BDB5DBDD for ; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 03:33:48 -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 27991-10 for ; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 06:33:42 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.171]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51F82B5DBDC for ; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 03:33:42 -0300 (ADT) Received: from [192.168.1.7] (mail.highperformancepostgresql.com [71.179.240.8]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mreu1) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0LzWb8-1Rdbqo3vfu-014ipR; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 08:33:41 +0200 Message-ID: <4E003B44.9090005@2ndQuadrant.com> Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 02:33:40 -0400 From: Greg Smith User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20110505 Icedove/3.0.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Contemplating SSD Hardware RAID References: <4E0015F2.9060504@drivefaster.net> In-Reply-To: <4E0015F2.9060504@drivefaster.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:oi/bYbScCClAfPiP3mKQDcUgZc63MLZ6hj1WK41gy6p +pWl9u3GLYu2YyzCgH5Qfr6AtGfeBedlBVtqdQLw4SPwqqkYh7 vmesV0bHDm5eOdJOJlj9jNX0O2Uh8tlqnPLvIpNvE35eePvezl 0KKE+GPrbCZNuscy6fJ7c79qYxbBGBYP0x1MfCbBQa2d+WDV6p cpH+iJLBWLwq5X+ly+YZtLm/GXKtDTpGwkMCB4qCiM= 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201106/192 X-Sequence-Number: 44125 On 06/20/2011 11:54 PM, Dan Harris wrote: > I understand that the majority of consumer grade SSD drives lack the > required capacitor to complete a write on a sudden power loss. But, > what about pairing up with a hardware controller with BBU write > cache? Can the write cache be disabled at the drive and result in a > safe setup? Sometimes, but not always, and you'll be playing a risky and unpredictable game to try it. See http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Reliable_Writes for some anecdotes. And even if the reliability works out, you'll kill the expected longevity and performance of the drive. > I'm exploring the combination of an Areca 1880ix-12 controller with 6x > OCZ Vertex 3 V3LT-25SAT3 2.5" 240GB SATA III drives in RAID-10. Has > anyone tried this combination? What nasty surprise am I overlooking > here? You can expect database corruption the first time something unexpected interrupts the power to the server. That's nasty, but it's not surprising--that's well documented as what happens when you run PostreSQL on hardware with this feature set. You have to get a Vertex 3 Pro to get one of the reliable 3rd gen designs from them with a supercap. (I don't think those are even out yet though) We've had reports here of the earlier Vertex 2 Pro being fully stress tested and working out well. I wouldn't even bother with a regular Vertex 3, because I don't see any reason to believe it could be reliable for database use, just like the Vertex 2 failed to work in that role. -- Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US greg@2ndQuadrant.com Baltimore, MD PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support www.2ndQuadrant.us "PostgreSQL 9.0 High Performance": http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/books