yes nick, you're right, I can now see on page 16 here www.intel.com/content/www/xa/en/solid-state-drives/ssd-dc-p3700-spec.html there is a difference in the durability. However, I think 7.3PBW isn't much worse than Intel S3610 that's much slower. thx will 400GB: 7.3 PBW 800GB: 14.6 PBW (10 drive writes/day*) 1.6TB: 43.8 PBW (15 drive writes/day*) 2.0TB: 62.05 PBW (17 drive writes/day*) On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 9:55 PM, Nick Fisk <nick@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I'm using the 400Gb models as a Journal for 12x drives. I know this is probably pushing it a little bit, but seems to work fine. I'm > guessing the reason may be relating to the TBW figure being higher on the more expensive models, maybe they don't want to have to > replace warn NVME's on warranty? > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: ceph-users [mailto:ceph-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of William Josefsson >> Sent: 18 November 2016 13:43 >> To: ceph-users <ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Subject: Intel P3700 SSD for journals >> >> Hi list, I wonder if there is anyone who have experience with Intel >> P3700 SSD drives as Journals, and can share their experience? >> >> I was thinking of using the P3700 SSD 400GB as journal in my ceph deployment. It is benchmarked in Sebastian hann ssd page as > well. >> However a vendor I spoke to didn't qualify the small sizes of this model as "enterprise grade/warranty". They suggested the 1.8TB > or >> 2TB. >> I have asked for clarification on why this is the case. >> >> Has anyone experienced any issues with the smaller size P3700 SSDs, and I'm not sure how a smaller drive could affect the quality > of >> the product? Maybe anyone can shed light on if the size of the SSD drive matters? thx will >> _______________________________________________ >> ceph-users mailing list >> ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com > _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
 |