Re: Completely un-tuned Postgresql benchmark results: SSD vs desktop HDD - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Scott Carey
Subject Re: Completely un-tuned Postgresql benchmark results: SSD vs desktop HDD
Date
Msg-id FEDD0586-54B5-4F42-94AF-ACB3D89075E8@richrelevance.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Completely un-tuned Postgresql benchmark results: SSD vs desktop HDD  (Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Completely un-tuned Postgresql benchmark results: SSD vs desktop HDD  (Arjen van der Meijden <acmmailing@tweakers.net>)
List pgsql-performance
On Aug 11, 2010, at 9:30 PM, Greg Smith wrote:

> Scott Carey wrote:
>> What is the likelihood that your RAID card fails, or that the battery that reported 'good health' only lasts 5
minutesand you lose data before power is restored?   What is the likelihood of human error? 
>>
>
> These are all things that happen sometimes, sure.  The problem with the
> cheap SSDs is that they happen downright often if you actually test for
> it.  If someone is aware of the risk and makes an informed decision,
> fine.  But most of the time I see articles like the one that started
> this thread that are oblivious to the issue, and that's really bad.
>

Agreed.  There is a HUGE gap between "ooh ssd's are fast, look!" and engineering a solution that uses them properly
withall their strengths and faults.  And as 'gnuoytr' points out, there is a big difference between an Intel SSD and
say,this thing: http://www.nimbusdata.com/products/s-class_overview.html  

> --
> Greg Smith  2ndQuadrant US  Baltimore, MD
> PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
> greg@2ndQuadrant.com   www.2ndQuadrant.us
>


pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: "Carlo Stonebanks"
Date:
Subject: Very bad plan when using VIEW and IN (SELECT...*)
Next
From: Arjen van der Meijden
Date:
Subject: Re: Completely un-tuned Postgresql benchmark results: SSD vs desktop HDD