Search Postgresql Archives

SSDs - SandForce or not?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi,
I'm wondering which type of SSDs would be better for use with PostgreSQL.

Background:
At the moment, SSD drives fall into two categories..
Those that use internal-compression on the SandForce controller, which gives very fast speeds for compressible data; and those that don't.

In benchmarks, the compressing style of drive do extremely well at random writes as long as there's semi-compressible-data involved. They still do well if uncompressible data is used, just usually not quite as well as the competitors.

When it comes to reading data, there's no real difference.

So I just wondered how this might apply to PostgreSQL's workload?

I think the on-disk data is going to consist of a lot of random reads and writes, with what I suspect is data that *does* compress quite well. (At least on my data sets, that is. If I use gzip or lzma on the postgres data directly, it gets MUCH smaller)

So on the face of it, I think the Sandforce-based drives are probably a winner here, so I should look at the Intel 520s for evaluation, and whatever the enterprise equivalent are for production.

I wondered if anyone else wiser than I has thought about this yet though.. are there any downsides to that combination?

cheers,
Toby


--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Postgresql Jobs]     [Postgresql Admin]     [Postgresql Performance]     [Linux Clusters]     [PHP Home]     [PHP on Windows]     [Kernel Newbies]     [PHP Classes]     [PHP Books]     [PHP Databases]     [Postgresql & PHP]     [Yosemite]
  Powered by Linux