Received: from magus.postgresql.org (magus.postgresql.org [87.238.57.229]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9A6E2B2868 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2012 13:05:51 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail-wg0-f50.google.com ([74.125.82.50]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SjBnQ-0004t3-Ow for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Mon, 25 Jun 2012 16:05:51 +0000 Received: by wgbds11 with SMTP id ds11so4290020wgb.19 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2012 09:05:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=JqyxbuIUZULFMMupuEOL5aaVXle1uf8nKf2ar6AJevk=; b=Uk+7HysalZEQwZX1lIWfCtvnOFkUawLzLOqNebUPVTbu3cG+PqM/d1SbHkk+o1FLud lZ8a5PeFSbCq7xunGHw9heY+sFq7Ld+Fv+6MP06nzK1hTIT16zPBsoiSrodY3YBeTetI QEN+iKZaszmg9AhE4KN7WMmg2rU3eIgeGIsecztlioC03vkPJOapUj2lD0JMCGFFI0zX arFhL4WDXhdLVRBPPswaiS6eaYa3oCSx1/6Ca5QYQBAXfQygAYqVkereWcugHwH24fn6 seKGI1fBv714Y+7Iq96ICAieUs4GeJfWvBbKjJhOgErl4qs/8kU55X2lEzzMkcqz9PmI llEg== Received: by 10.180.105.234 with SMTP id gp10mr25677943wib.11.1340640335540; Mon, 25 Jun 2012 09:05:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.73.63] (5357DA75.cm-6-8d.dynamic.ziggo.nl. [83.87.218.117]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id k8sm35062718wia.6.2012.06.25.09.05.33 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 25 Jun 2012 09:05:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4FE88C38.1010604@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 18:05:12 +0200 From: Yeb Havinga User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.28) Gecko/20120306 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.20 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Michal Szymanski CC: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: SSD, Postgres and safe write cache References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Pg-Spam-Score: -2.7 (--) X-Archive-Number: 201206/131 X-Sequence-Number: 47157 On 2012-06-20 16:51, Michal Szymanski wrote: > Hi, > We started to think about using SSD drive for our telco system DB. Because we have many "almost" read-only data I think SSD is good candidate for our task. We would like to speed up process of read operation. > I've read post (http://blog.2ndquadrant.com/intel_ssd_now_off_the_sherr_sh/) about SSD which have write safe functionality and two drive are recommended Intel 320 and Vertex2 Pro. Both drive are rather inexpensive but both using old SATA II. > I tried to find newer faster version of Vertex because production Vertex 2 Pro is stopped but there is no information about new drives that has similar functionality and are cheap. Do you recommend cheap SSD drives that are suitable for DB needs? We were able to get OCZ Deneva 2's (http://www.oczenterprise.com/downloads/solutions/ocz-deneva2-r-mlc-2.5in_Product_Brief.pdf) from our supplier, which were suggested by OCZ as replacement for the vertex 2 pro's. They're marketed as safe under power failure and our tests with the diskchecker tool confirmed that. regards, Yeb Havinga