| From: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Scott Carey <scott(at)richrelevance(dot)com>, Michael March <mmarch(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Completely un-tuned Postgresql benchmark results: SSD vs desktop HDD |
| Date: | 2010-08-10 16:27:20 |
| Message-ID: | 4C617DE8.4030203@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Jeff Davis wrote:
> Depending on which 256K you lose, you might as well lose your entire
> database.
>
Let's be nice and assume that you only lose one 8K block because of the
SSD write cache; that's not so bad, right? Guess what--you could easily
be the next lucky person who discovers the block corrupted is actually
in the middle of the pg_class system catalog, where the list of tables
in the database is at! Enjoy getting your data back again with that
piece missing. It's really a fun time, I'll tell you that.
--
Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com www.2ndQuadrant.us
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thom Brown | 2010-08-10 16:28:46 | Re: Sorted group by |
| Previous Message | Thomas Kellerer | 2010-08-10 16:22:27 | Re: Sorted group by |