Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2007 13:15:41 -0500 From: Travis Mikalson <bofh@terranova.net> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS melting under postgres... Message-ID: <476419CD.9070401@terranova.net> In-Reply-To: <fk0ue7$bp$1@ger.gmane.org> References: <47606C09.2070209@isc.org> <47609F0A.7010805@clearchain.com> <47609FE3.8040606@barafranca.com> <4760B444.1080604@clearchain.com> <06CAC7FC-DB58-441D-A6E0-76D1D8133393@tamu.edu> <86ir31xwlu.fsf@ds4.des.no> <ADCCD5E6-A792-49B9-A346-753176C12F2E@tamu.edu> <fjuljp$cvb$1@ger.gmane.org> <476343B4.8080208@FreeBSD.org> <fk09p8$b16$1@ger.gmane.org> <86tzmk54tt.fsf@ds4.des.no> <fk0ue7$bp$1@ger.gmane.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ivan Voras wrote: > Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: >> Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org> writes: >>> Maxim Sobolev wrote: >>>> That's no longer true. You can't get more than 5-10MB/s from >>>> seek-intensive RAID0 with two 15K drives, while 20-30MB/s is not a >>>> problem for the comparable priced/sized SSD drive. >>> Can you point me at a vendor with SSDs of such characteristics? >> Kingston CF Elite, 20 / 25 MBps write / read >> Kingston CF Ultimate, 40 / 45 MBps write / read >> >> SanDisk Extreme III CF, 20 MBps >> SanDisk Extreme IV CF, 45 MBps >> >> Sony CF 300X, 45 MBps >> >> These are just a few of those available from my regular supplier. > > These are all "normal" CompactFlash cards, for which the widely > available size seems to be 16 GB max, right? I was thinking about > something more like this: > http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/peripherals/adatas-128gb-solid-state-drive-sees-the-light-of-day-231693.php > or this: http://www.mtron.net/English/Product/pc_msd1000.asp > > Did you (or anyone) deploy CF drives for production servers? If you're using compact flash for something that's constantly updated like a ZIL, wouldn't your CF card die real quick? I've deployed CF in production, but as a read-only medium with occasional writes only for configuration updates. From what I understand the specialized expensive solid-state drives that you guys are discussing are better designed for this type of write duty whereas CF would probably not last very long. Since a ZIL is not really seek-intensive, why not just offload it to its own standard hard disk that has its write caching and all other similar data-corrupting technologies disabled?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?476419CD.9070401>