Postgres Professional
   

random_page_cost vs ssd?

From: Jeff
Subject: random_page_cost vs ssd?
Date: ,
Msg-id: B1349331-0035-4FFE-80E9-91A4B168F4DB@torgo.978.org
(view: Whole thread, Raw)
Responses: Re: random_page_cost vs ssd?  (Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz)
List: pgsql-performance

Tree view

random_page_cost vs ssd?  (Jeff, )
 Re: random_page_cost vs ssd?  (Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz, )
  Re: random_page_cost vs ssd?  (Scott Carey, )
   Re: random_page_cost vs ssd?  (Andrej, )
    Re: random_page_cost vs ssd?  (Scott Carey, )
     Re: random_page_cost vs ssd?  (hubert depesz lubaczewski, )
     Re: random_page_cost vs ssd?  ("Kevin Grittner", )
      Re: random_page_cost vs ssd?  (Scott Carey, ) 
I've got a couple x25-e's in production now and they are working like
a champ.  (In fact, I've got another box being built with all x25s in
it. its going to smoke!)

Anyway, I was just reading another thread on here and that made me
wonder about random_page_cost in the world of an ssd where a seek is
basically free.  I haven't tested this yet (I can do that next week),
but logically, in this scenario wouldn't lowering random_page_cost be
ideal or would it not really matter in the grand scheme of things?

--
Jeff Trout <>
http://www.stuarthamm.net/
http://www.dellsmartexitin.com/

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous:
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Full statement logging problematic on larger machines?
Next:
From: "Jignesh K. Shah"
Date:
Subject: Proposal of tunable fix for scalability of 8.4