From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com>, pgsql-performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: SSD + RAID |
Date: | 2010-02-27 01:40:18 |
Message-ID: | 201002270140.o1R1eIm24724@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
I have added documentation about the ATAPI drive flush command, and the
typical SSD behavior.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greg Smith wrote:
> Ron Mayer wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> >> Agreed, thought I thought the problem was that SSDs lie about their
> >> cache flush like SATA drives do, or is there something I am missing?
> >>
> >
> > There's exactly one case I can find[1] where this century's IDE
> > drives lied more than any other drive with a cache:
>
> Ron is correct that the problem of mainstream SATA drives accepting the
> cache flush command but not actually doing anything with it is long gone
> at this point. If you have a regular SATA drive, it almost certainly
> supports proper cache flushing. And if your whole software/storage
> stacks understands all that, you should not end up with corrupted data
> just because there's a volative write cache in there.
>
> But the point of this whole testing exercise coming back into vogue
> again is that SSDs have returned this negligent behavior to the
> mainstream again. See
> http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=121424 for a discussion
> of this in a ZFS context just last month. There are many documented
> cases of Intel SSDs that will fake a cache flush, such that the only way
> to get good reliable writes is to totally disable their writes
> caches--at which point performance is so bad you might as well have
> gotten a RAID10 setup instead (and longevity is toast too).
>
> This whole area remains a disaster area and extreme distrust of all the
> SSD storage vendors is advisable at this point. Basically, if I don't
> see the capacitor responsible for flushing outstanding writes, and get a
> clear description from the manufacturer how the cached writes are going
> to be handled in the event of a power failure, at this point I have to
> assume the answer is "badly and your data will be eaten". And the
> prices for SSDs that meet that requirement are still quite steep. I
> keep hoping somebody will address this market at something lower than
> the standard "enterprise" prices. The upcoming SandForce designs seem
> to have thought this through correctly:
> http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3702&p=6 But the
> product's not out to the general public yet (just like the Seagate units
> that claim to have capacitor backups--I heard a rumor those are also
> Sandforce designs actually, so they may be the only ones doing this
> right and aiming at a lower price).
>
> --
> Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US Baltimore, MD
> PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
> greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com www.2ndQuadrant.us
>
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
PG East: http://www.enterprisedb.com/community/nav-pg-east-2010.do
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
/rtmp/diff | text/x-diff | 1.6 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Smith | 2010-02-27 19:38:20 | Re: SSD + RAID |
Previous Message | Tory M Blue | 2010-02-26 23:24:42 | Re: bgwriter, checkpoints, curious (seeing delays) |