| From: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tomas Vondra <tv(at)fuzzy(dot)cz> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Reliability with RAID 10 SSD and Streaming Replication |
| Date: | 2013-05-20 22:32:40 |
| Message-ID: | CAHyXU0wvW-USgbkXAYEHLG2fHgj=UdZi1aCFoVWBMQEsOFZy+A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 3:57 PM, Tomas Vondra <tv(at)fuzzy(dot)cz> wrote:
> But yes, I do agree that the provider should be ashamed for not
> providing reliable SSDs in the first place. Getting reliable SSDs should
> be the first option - all these suggestions are really just workarounds
> of this rather simple issue.
Absolutely. Reliable SSD should be the first and only option. They
are significantly more expensive (more than 2x) but are worth it.
When it comes to databases, particularly in the open source postgres
world, hard drives are completely obsolete. SSD are a couple of
orders of magnitude faster and this (while still slow in computer
terms) is fast enough to put storage into the modern area by anyone
who is smart enough to connect a sata cable. While everyone likes to
obsess over super scalable architectures technology has finally
advanced to the point where your typical SMB system can be handled by
a sincle device.
merlin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Sameer Thakur | 2013-05-21 11:56:52 | pg_statsinfo : error could not connect to repository |
| Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2013-05-20 20:57:13 | Re: Reliability with RAID 10 SSD and Streaming Replication |