Received: from maia.hub.org (unknown [200.46.208.211])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30EFF63764F
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@mail.postgresql.org>;
	Tue, 23 Feb 2010 08:07:57 -0400 (AST)
Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86])
	by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.211]) (amavisd-maia,
	port 10024) with ESMTP id 14835-08
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@mail.postgresql.org>;
	Tue, 23 Feb 2010 12:07:39 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-ww0-f46.google.com (mail-ww0-f46.google.com
 [74.125.82.46])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44DEC63352A
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Tue, 23 Feb 2010 08:07:46 -0400 (AST)
Received: by wwf26 with SMTP id 26so702832wwf.19
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Tue, 23 Feb 2010 04:07:44 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references
	:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type;
	bh=WwSQ4AWD/22cc0shZ91gKXpyOY87VUqnzU2Dv4f57YE=;
	b=PWJa3ZIiUO4VuoH8UlkaFqU6HRPd+7dCkausXKIk5j+4yhe67ESijwTDeejyr8jRWR
	HrmgpGDkOpGNtLPHVp68P72ZJzJlKYDZEOXIy24cA71iUoTa4I1l2/VOjH/8f87LcnfI
	L61dzfR0ZbwXEYECAdHixgNSLK5c0lnSOVYSI=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
	:cc:content-type;
	b=BOztlUJSURcZphjDSlLTiru4Wqh1W662Hoa3g5o+AoBcUX9e7NhLrRJNhgiJU4ktsl
	RJ65O5JifUF79Pxg/uWLErJz8+hgrjQMJD/p3V0/bZURVmxGx5L7TOxhEUpxOMPHngxL
	KOxUYNh8Ow5tsVKzjrDMrSAUmfw3F8jsg0gs8=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.216.172.76 with SMTP id s54mr1842321wel.100.1266926864144;
	Tue, 23 Feb 2010 04:07:44 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <op.u8kwherdeorkce@localhost>
References: <201002211410.o1LEAht05941@momjian.us>
	<4B814920.1040204@cheapcomplexdevices.com>
	<4B82187A.7060604@2ndquadrant.com> <4B822DFF.50501@tweakers.net>
	<4B8329A3.4040003@2ndquadrant.com> <4B832B3E.9080207@mark.mielke.cc>
	<4B8331D5.7000802@2ndquadrant.com>
	<dcc563d11002221821p773906a5hf3d3ffaf39bbddc6@mail.gmail.com>
	<dcc563d11002221822u3bd625a9n8772e1214cf6480@mail.gmail.com>
	<op.u8kwherdeorkce@localhost>
From: Nikolas Everett <nik9000@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 07:07:24 -0500
Message-ID: <d4e11e981002230407pd4b5888ibb3181c6f8471b06@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: SSD + RAID
To: Pierre C <lists@peufeu.com>
Cc: Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>,
 Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>,
	Mark Mielke <mark@mark.mielke.cc>,
	Arjen van der Meijden <acmmailing@tweakers.net>,
	pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001636426eb7b19890048043651e
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.391 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=AWL=-1.207,
	BAYES_40=-0.185, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 201002/318
X-Sequence-Number: 37739

--001636426eb7b19890048043651e
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 6:49 AM, Pierre C <lists@peufeu.com> wrote:

>  Note that's power draw per bit.  dram is usually much more densely
>> packed (it can be with fewer transistors per cell) so the individual
>> chips for each may have similar power draws while the dram will be 10
>> times as densely packed as the sram.
>>
>
> Differences between SRAM and DRAM :
>
> [lots of informative stuff]
>

I've been slowly reading the paper at
http://people.redhat.com/drepper/cpumemory.pdf  which has a big section on
SRAM vs DRAM with nice pretty pictures. While not strictly relevant its been
illuminating and I wanted to share.

--001636426eb7b19890048043651e
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 6:49 AM, Pierre =
C <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:lists@peufeu.com">lists@peufeu.co=
m</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margi=
n:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">

<div class=3D"im"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .=
8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Note that&#39;s power draw per bit. =A0dram is usually much more densely<br=
>
packed (it can be with fewer transistors per cell) so the individual<br>
chips for each may have similar power draws while the dram will be 10<br>
times as densely packed as the sram.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
Differences between SRAM and DRAM :<br>
<br><div><div class=3D"h5">[lots of informative stuff]</div></div></blockqu=
ote><div><br></div><div>I&#39;ve been slowly reading the paper at <a href=
=3D"http://people.redhat.com/drepper/cpumemory.pdf">http://people.redhat.co=
m/drepper/cpumemory.pdf</a> =A0which has a big section on SRAM vs DRAM with=
 nice pretty pictures. While not strictly=A0relevant=A0its been illuminatin=
g and I wanted to share.</div>

<div>=A0</div></div><br>

--001636426eb7b19890048043651e--