From: | Chris Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Making the most of memory? |
Date: | 2008-01-24 16:23:02 |
Message-ID: | 60r6g7kxax.fsf@dba2.int.libertyrms.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
fweimer(at)bfk(dot)de (Florian Weimer) writes:
>> So, that web site seems to list products starting at about 32GB in a
>> separate rack-mounted box with redundant everything. I'd be more
>> interested in just putting the WAL on an SSD device, so 500MB or 1GB
>> would be quite sufficient. Can anyone point me towards such a device?
>
> A dedicated RAID controller with battery-backed cache of ssuficient
> size and two mirrored disks should not perform that bad, and has the
> advantage of easy availability.
That won't provide as "souped up" performance as "WAL on SSD," and
it's from technical people wishing for things that some of those
things actually emerge...
It appears that the SSD market place is going pretty "nuts" right now
as vendors are hawking flash-based SSD devices that are specifically
targeted at replacing disk drives for laptops.
I agree that there would be a considerable value for DBMS applications
in having availability of a device that combines the strengths of both
Flash (persistence) and DRAM (sheer volume of IOPs) to provide
something better than they offered alone. I expect that the standard
size for this is more likely to be 32GB than 1GB, what with modern
shrinkage of physical sizing...
--
let name="cbbrowne" and tld="linuxfinances.info" in String.concat "@" [name;tld];;
http://www3.sympatico.ca/cbbrowne/spiritual.html
"When we write programs that "learn", it turns out that we do and they
don't." -- Alan J. Perlis
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tory M Blue | 2008-01-24 17:46:19 | Re: Postgres 8.2 memory weirdness |
Previous Message | Chris Browne | 2008-01-24 16:09:08 | Re: Making the most of memory? |