Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-5.hub.org [200.46.204.29]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65927133655C for ; Wed, 6 Apr 2011 21:42:30 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.29]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 43400-08 for ; Thu, 7 Apr 2011 00:42:21 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from EXHUB018-1.exch018.msoutlookonline.net (exhub018-1.exch018.msoutlookonline.net [64.78.17.16]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DC761337BD4 for ; Wed, 6 Apr 2011 21:42:19 -0300 (ADT) Received: from EXVMBX018-1.exch018.msoutlookonline.net ([64.78.17.47]) by EXHUB018-1.exch018.msoutlookonline.net ([64.78.17.16]) with mapi; Wed, 6 Apr 2011 17:42:19 -0700 From: Scott Carey To: Merlin Moncure , Greg Smith CC: "pgsql-performance@postgresql.org" Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 17:42:17 -0700 Subject: Re: Intel SSDs that may not suck Thread-Topic: [PERFORM] Intel SSDs that may not suck Thread-Index: Acv0vKZMh//1TQcJSoGaCQjz/4nUSg== Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.0.101115 acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 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 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201104/61 X-Sequence-Number: 43123 On 4/5/11 7:07 AM, "Merlin Moncure" wrote: >On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 8:26 PM, Greg Smith wrote: >> >> If you really don't need more than 120GB of storage, but do care about >> random I/O speed, this is a pretty easy decision now--presuming the >>drive >> holds up to claims. As the claims are reasonable relative to the >> engineering that went into the drive now, that may actually be the case. > >One thing about MLC flash drives (which the industry seems to be >moving towards) is that you have to factor drive lifespan into the >total system balance of costs. Data point: had an ocz vertex 2 that >burned out in ~ 18 months. In the post mortem, it was determined that >the drive met and exceeded its 10k write limit -- this was a busy >production box. What OCZ Drive? What controller? Indilinx? SandForce? Wear-leveling on these vary quite a bit. Intel claims write lifetimes in the single digit PB sizes for these 310's. They are due to have an update to the X25-E line too at some point. Public roadmaps say this will be using "enterprise" MLC. This stuff trades off write endurance for data longevity -- if left without power for too long the data will be lost. This is a tradeoff for all flash -- but the stuff that is optimized for USB sticks is quite different than the stuff optimized for servers. > >merlin > >--=20 >Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) >To make changes to your subscription: >http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance