max bianco wrote:
2008/7/22 Rich Emberson <emberson.rich@xxxxxxxxx>:
For a non-laptop machine with the following target
characteristics: energy efficient, non-gaming, powerful
and fast; should SSDs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid-state_drive)
be used and, if so, how? SSD have very fast seek times and
can have fast read speeds (http://www.datamarck.com/benchmarks).
Specifically, what directories ought to be allocated to
the SSD drives?
Are you combining a SSD with a regular old HDD? That's what it sounds
like. Is there going to be any real performance benefit here? If you
have one 7200 rpm and one 10000rpm, AFAIK you'll be limited to the
7200 speed. You can only go as fast as your slowest man. Is that not
true with SSD? Can you in fact combine them with regular drives
without sacrificing performance?
-Max
If you're doing RAID, you'll get the slowest speed, but that's not what
he's talking about. If you put your random-access data on a small,
expensive, low-latency device, be it SSD or high-end disk, and put your
sequential-access data on a large, cheap, high-latency disk, it'll
perform quite nicely, because the sequential access pattern hides the
latency of the slow disk quite well. This is why high-end streaming
media servers use 7200 RPM SATA drives, even though everything else in
the data center is using SAS or Fibre Channel storage.
-- Chris
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
