| From: | Fernando Hevia <fhevia(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ryan Thompson <agyant(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>, Achilleas Mantzios <achill(at)matrix(dot)gatewaynet(dot)com>, "pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Samsung SSD 850 PRO 1T : any good for PostgreSQL? |
| Date: | 2015-03-13 16:01:45 |
| Message-ID: | CAGYT1XSn3sjZXGcbnv1EMz8YEgwHjsaV+VqXY8Fzmh4wMb7Y1w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Ryan Thompson <agyant(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Personally, I'd steer clear of Samsung desktop SSDs for anything
> mission-critical. I've seen them get ripped apart by standard SATA
> controllers as well as LSI MegaRAID. My rule of thumb is Samsung is okay as
> long as we're using RAID 1.
>
> For data loss, pick up a RAID controller card with BBU or capacitor-based
> cache protection. That way, in the event of a total power failure, the data
> integrity is maintained and simply continues writing to disk once power is
> restored.
>
I am afraid that won't suffice. The HD will signal the controller that the
data has been committed safely - which we know is not the case - and the
controller cache data would be discarded to make room for new blocks.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Achilleas Mantzios | 2015-03-13 17:05:04 | Re: Samsung SSD 850 PRO 1T : any good for PostgreSQL? |
| Previous Message | Scott Marlowe | 2015-03-13 15:59:16 | Re: Samsung SSD 850 PRO 1T : any good for PostgreSQL? |