On Thu, 2014-04-03 at 12:32 -0700, David Rees wrote: > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 12:13 PM, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 2:37 PM, Bret Stern > > <bret_stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Any opinions/comments on using SSD drives with postgresql? > > > > Here's a single S3700 smoking an array of 16 15k drives (poster didn't > > realize that; was to focused on synthetic numbers): > > http://dba.stackexchange.com/questions/45224/postgres-write-performance-on-intel-s3700-ssd > > I just ran a quick test earlier this week on an old Dell 2970 (2 > Opteron 2387, 16GB RAM) comparing a 6-disk RAID10 with 10k 147GB SAS > disks to a 2-disk RAID1 with 480GB Intel S3500 SSDs and found the SSDs > are about 4-6x faster using pgbench and a scaling factor of 1100. Some > sort of MegaRAID controller according to lspci and has BBU. TPS > numbers below are approximate. > > RAID10 disk array: > 8 clients: 350 tps > 16 clients: 530 tps > 32 clients: 800 tps > > RAID1 SSD array: > 8 clients: 2100 tps > 16 clients: 2500 tps > 32 clients: 3100 tps > > So yeah, even the slower, cheaper S3500 SSDs are way fast. If your > write workload isn't too high, the S3500 can work well. Is a write cycle anywhere on the drive different than a re-write? Or is a write a write! They feedback/comments are awesome. I'm shopping.. > We'll see how > the SMART drive lifetime numbers do once we get into production, but > right now we estimate they should last at least 5 years and from what > we've seen it seems that SSDs seem to wear much better than expected. > If not, we'll pony up and go for the S3700 or perhaps move the xlog > back on to spinning disks. > > -Dave -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
