| From: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andy <angelflow(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
| Cc: | David Boreham <david_list(at)boreham(dot)org>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Intel 320 SSD info |
| Date: | 2011-08-24 18:27:30 |
| Message-ID: | CAHyXU0zzGoVDnxLkJx7fVrmwOeb4b8L+D+t1-RC8dFTWeEK7TA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 12:23 PM, Andy <angelflow(at)yahoo(dot)com> wrote:
> According to the specs for database storage:
> "Random 4KB arites: Up to 600 IOPS"
> Is that for real? 600 IOPS is *atrociously terrible* for an SSD. Not much
> faster than mechanical disks.
> Has anyone done any performance benchmark of 320 used as a DB storage? Is it
> really that slow?
I have one experience with 320 SSD that replaced a 4 drive RAID 10 10k
raid. The site users and administrator in question gave summarized
the before/after experience thusly: "PFM" (Pure Magic). Workload-wise
it was a largish database (200gb+), 50% read, 50% write, mixed
olap/oltp.
merlin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | gnuoytr | 2011-08-24 18:48:09 | Re: Reports from SSD purgatory |
| Previous Message | Scott Marlowe | 2011-08-24 18:23:14 | Re: How to track number of connections and hosts to Postgres cluster |