Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UfB2k-0001dt-0i for pgsql-performance@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 22 May 2013 15:33:34 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UfB2j-00086R-6C for pgsql-performance@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 22 May 2013 15:33:33 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:7903:4::125]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UfB2h-00086J-2e for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Wed, 22 May 2013 15:33:31 +0000 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.186]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1UfB2a-0007gn-DY for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Wed, 22 May 2013 15:33:30 +0000 Received: from [192.168.1.110] (mail.highperformancepostgresql.com [71.179.240.8]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mrbap3) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0MC1A0-1UnwSr3n1s-008rYE; Wed, 22 May 2013 17:33:19 +0200 Message-ID: <519CE53C.1040703@2ndQuadrant.com> Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 11:33:16 -0400 From: Greg Smith User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120713 Thunderbird/14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Merlin Moncure CC: Tomas Vondra , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Reliability with RAID 10 SSD and Streaming Replication References: <51957499.6050905@fuzzy.cz> <519991EB.8010208@2ndQuadrant.com> <519A8E29.60702@fuzzy.cz> <519C0EFD.9080002@2ndQuadrant.com> <519CD3BD.3010305@2ndQuadrant.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:lN0w23D7Ax7s47f0xnSvd/UykrlkAnRVPqAEXYxfela UYd+JCCS3nZ3oPePCPgjDsNuWNU9FMTtTirFGJBeKatPHc2gpk TVWQBlEIgMDQ8n+3UG6+j/O/qoJmevC5fchYU0yR8ModtLbbBT 9dU1oy7sEmnrEAnff2Cfvqn7ClW3RMCBXNqvlVGieZ8m+CWpuo QGUjnnnxWY+U6IWvymf3fuSp0QFbrjqarMow2gmUDe1cwQtCY8 7L7u8+FyDCNVPFDEm08SACrrXZb4goRxORlrnzrpGRvB6SgymO nhFopJQlL3h3W/aVYoGkt9oBSHm/8JS9oUd7Uacfh5x53dYS97 NJ40goSX7t4Y3/B+XhXg= X-Pg-Spam-Score: 0.8 (/) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-performance Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org On 5/22/13 11:05 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote: > unfortunately, I don't have a s3700 to > test with, but based on everything i've seen it looks like it's a > mostly solved problem. (for example, see here: > http://www.storagereview.com/intel_ssd_dc_s3700_series_enterprise_ssd_review). > Tests that drive the 710 to <3k iops were not able to take the 3700 > down under 10k at any queue depth. I have two weeks of real-world data from DC S3700 units in production and a pile of synthetic test results. The S3700 drives are at least 2X as fast as the 710 models, and there are synthetic tests where it's closer to 10X. On a 5,000 IOPS workload that crushed a pair of 710 units, the new drives are only hitting 50% utilization now. Does that make worst-case 10K? Maybe. I can't just extrapolate from the 50% figures and predict the throughput I'll see at 100% though, so I'm still waiting for more data before I feel comfortable saying exactly what the worst case looks like. -- Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US greg@2ndQuadrant.com Baltimore, MD PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support www.2ndQuadrant.com -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance