| From: | Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Intel's X25-M SSD |
| Date: | 2008-09-20 03:23:32 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.GSO.4.64.0809192316340.19112@westnet.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Mon, 8 Sep 2008, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> What's interesting about the X25 is that they managed to pull the
> numbers they got out of a MLC flash product. They managed this with a
> DRAM buffer and the custom controller.
I finally found a good analysis of what's wrong with most of the cheap MLC
drives:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=3403&p=7
240ms random write latency...wow, no wonder I keep hearing so many reports
of cheap SSD just performing miserably. JMicron is one of those companies
I really avoid, never seen a design from them that wasn't cheap junk.
Shame their awful part is in so many of the MLC flash products.
--
* Greg Smith gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Sabin Coanda | 2008-09-22 20:40:15 | Re: Different execution plan |
| Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2008-09-19 18:43:24 | Re: why does this use the wrong index? |