On 10-08-12 03:22 AM, Arjen van der Meijden wrote:
> On 12-8-2010 2:53 gnuoytr@rcn.com wrote:
>> - The value of SSD in the database world is not as A Faster HDD(tm).
>> Never was, despite the naive' who assert otherwise. The value of SSD
>> is to enable BCNF datastores. Period. If you're not going to do
>> that, don't bother. Silicon storage will never reach equivalent
>> volumetric density, ever. SSD will never be useful in the byte bloat
>> world of xml and other flat file datastores (resident in databases or
>> not). Industrial strength SSD will always be more expensive/GB, and
>> likely by a lot. (Re)factoring to high normalization strips out an
>> order of magnitude of byte bloat, increases native data integrity by
>> as much, reduces much of the redundant code, and puts the ACID where
>> it belongs. All good things, but not effortless.
>
> It is actually quite common to under-utilize (short stroke) hard
> drives in the enterprise world. Simply because 'they' need more IOps
> per amount of data than a completely utilized disk can offer.
> As such the expense/GB can be much higher than simply dividing the
> capacity by its price (and if you're looking at fiber channel disks,
> that price is quite high already). And than it is relatively easy to
> find enterprise SSD's with better pricing for the whole system as soon
> as the IOps are more important than the capacity.
And when you compare the ongoing operational costs of rack space,
powering and cooling for big arrays full of spinning disks to flash
based solutions the price comparison evens itself out even more.
--
Brad Nicholson 416-673-4106
Database Administrator, Afilias Canada Corp.
