On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 6:39 PM, Greg Smith <greg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Mark Mielke wrote: >> >> I had read the above when posted, and then looked up SRAM. SRAM seems to >> suggest it will hold the data even after power loss, but only for a period >> of time. As long as power can restore within a few minutes, it seemed like >> this would be ok? > > The normal type of RAM everyone uses is DRAM, which requires constrant > "refresh" cycles to keep it working and is pretty power hungry as a result. > Power gone, data gone an instant later. Actually, oddly enough, per bit stored dram is much lower power usage than sram, because it only has something like 2 transistors per bit, while sram needs something like 4 or 5 (it's been a couple decades since I took the classes on each). Even with the constant refresh, dram has a lower power draw than sram. -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
