XLog vs SSD [Was: Re: random write in xlog?]

From: James Cloos <cloos(at)jhcloos(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, flyusa2010 fly <flyusa2010(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: XLog vs SSD [Was: Re: random write in xlog?]
Date: 2010-12-08 20:15:18
Message-ID: m3d3pcyqa9.fsf_-_@jhcloos.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>>>>> "JJ" == Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:

JJ> Anyway, the writes are logically sequentially, but not physically.
JJ> If I remember correctly, it always writes out full blocks, even if
JJ> the last part of the block has not yet been filled with new data.
JJ> When the remainder gets filled, it then writes out the full block
JJ> again, both the already written and the new part.

What does that mean for use of a flash SSD for the xlog dir?

Does the block writing mesh up well with the usage pattern a flash
SSD needs to maximize lifespan?

I'd love a dram ssd for pg_xlog and the journals for the other
filesystems, but they cost too much.

-JimC
--
James Cloos <cloos(at)jhcloos(dot)com> OpenPGP: 1024D/ED7DAEA6

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dimitri Fontaine 2010-12-08 20:18:16 Re: Review: Extensions Patch
Previous Message Kineticode Billing 2010-12-08 20:12:50 Re: unlogged tables