Re: BBU still needed with SSD? - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: BBU still needed with SSD?
Date
Msg-id 201107190159.p6J1xuT07770@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: BBU still needed with SSD?  (Andy <angelflow@yahoo.com>)
Responses Re: BBU still needed with SSD?  (Andy <angelflow@yahoo.com>)
List pgsql-performance
Andy wrote:
>
>
> --- On Mon, 7/18/11, David Rees <drees76@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >> In this case is BBU still needed? If I put 2 SSD
> > in software RAID 1, would
> > >> that be any slower than 2 SSD in HW RAID 1 with
> > BBU? What are the pros and
> > >> cons?
> >
> > What will perform better will vary greatly depending on the
> > exact
> > SSDs, rotating disks, RAID BBU controller and
> > application.? But
> > certainly a couple of Intel 320s in RAID1 seem to be an
> > inexpensive
> > way of getting very good performance while maintaining
> > reliability.
>
> I'm not comparing SSD in SW RAID with rotating disks in HW RAID with
> BBU though. I'm just comparing SSDs with or without BBU. I'm going to
> get a couple of Intel 320s, just want to know if BBU makes sense for
> them.

Yes, it certainly does, even if you have a RAID BBU.

--
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + It's impossible for everything to be true. +

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Scott Marlowe
Date:
Subject: Re: cpu comparison
Next
From: "M. D."
Date:
Subject: Re: cpu comparison