Synchronous replication + Fusion-io = waste of money OR significant performance boost? (compared to normal SATA-based SSD-disks)?

From: Joel Jacobson <joel(at)trustly(dot)com>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Synchronous replication + Fusion-io = waste of money OR significant performance boost? (compared to normal SATA-based SSD-disks)?
Date: 2012-03-07 08:54:11
Message-ID: CAASwCXdqMQR1kMLarOr_NB9UewMyTxzd_y3Af+uwNaYdf_qmbg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

My company is in the process of migrating to a new pair of servers, running 9.1.

The database performance monetary transactions, we require
synchronous_commit on for all transactions.

Fusion-io is being considered, but will it give any significant
performance gain compared to normal SATA-based SSD-disks, due to the
fact we must replicate synchronously?

To make it more complicated, what about SLC vs MLC (for synchronous
replication)?

Assume optimal conditions, both servers have less than a meter between
each other, with the best possible network link between them providing
the lowest latency possible, maxed out RAM, maxed out CPUs, etc.

I've already asked this question to one of the core members, but the
answer was basically "you will have to test", I was therefore hoping
someone in the community already had some test results to avoid
wasting money.

Thank you for any advice!

Best regards,

Joel Jacobson
Trustly Group AB (former Glue Finance AB)

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message mdione.ext 2012-03-07 10:18:47 ERROR: could not find tuple for trigger 37463634
Previous Message Aleksey Tsalolikhin 2012-03-07 03:05:36 A 154 GB table swelled to 527 GB on the Slony slave. How to compact it?