Re: Testing Sandforce SSD - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Yeb Havinga
Subject Re: Testing Sandforce SSD
Date
Msg-id 4C4D6396.5020707@gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Testing Sandforce SSD  (Matthew Wakeling <matthew@flymine.org>)
Responses Re: Testing Sandforce SSD  (Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-performance
Matthew Wakeling wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Jul 2010, Yeb Havinga wrote:
>> Graph of TPS at http://tinypic.com/r/b96aup/3 and latency at
>> http://tinypic.com/r/x5e846/3
>
> Does your latency graph really have milliseconds as the y axis?
Yes
> If so, this device is really slow - some requests have a latency of
> more than a second!
I try to just give the facts. Please remember that particular graphs are
from a read/write pgbench run on a bigger than RAM database that ran for
some time (so with checkpoints), on a *single* $435 50GB drive without
BBU raid controller. Also, this is a picture with a few million points:
the ones above 200ms are perhaps a hundred and hence make up a very
small fraction.

So far I'm pretty impressed with this drive. Lets be fair to OCZ and the
SandForce guys and do not shoot from the hip things like "really slow",
without that being backed by a graphed pgbench run together with it's
cost, so we can compare numbers with numbers.

regards,
Yeb Havinga


pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Piotr Gasidło
Date:
Subject: Re: Big difference in time returned by EXPLAIN ANALYZE SELECT ... AND SELECT ...
Next
From: Greg Smith
Date:
Subject: Re: Testing Sandforce SSD