From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 23 22:05:27 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: FreeBSD-Questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AA6C106568B for ; Tue, 23 Jun 2009 22:05:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dkelly@Grumpy.DynDNS.org) Received: from smtp.knology.net (smtp.knology.net [24.214.63.101]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 302378FC18 for ; Tue, 23 Jun 2009 22:05:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dkelly@Grumpy.DynDNS.org) Received: (qmail 30994 invoked by uid 0); 23 Jun 2009 22:05:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO Grumpy.DynDNS.org) (24.42.224.110) by smtp2.knology.net with SMTP; 23 Jun 2009 22:05:25 -0000 Received: by Grumpy.DynDNS.org (Postfix, from userid 928) id 249892841F; Tue, 23 Jun 2009 17:05:25 -0500 (CDT) Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 17:05:25 -0500 From: David Kelly To: Polytropon Message-ID: <20090623220525.GA44363@Grumpy.DynDNS.org> References: <20090622230729.GA20167@thought.org> <20090623201041.GA23561@thought.org> <20090623205944.GA43982@Grumpy.DynDNS.org> <20090623231205.15b18fb2.freebsd@edvax.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090623231205.15b18fb2.freebsd@edvax.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: Gary Kline , FreeBSD-Questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: you're not going to believe this. X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: FreeBSD-Questions@FreeBSD.org List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 22:05:28 -0000 On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 11:12:05PM +0200, Polytropon wrote: > On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 15:59:44 -0500, David Kelly wrote: > > We are already there. SSDs are not slower than mechanical disk > > drives, they are faster. The only detriments are 1) cost, 2) limited > > write life. > > What about power consumption? Because they seem to be primarily > intended for portable devices, it should be better than "tradidional > hard disks", but as I read, it's worse (less efficient, because higher > current drain). Don't think generic generalizations can be made this early in the life of the technology. Shop for SSDs while looking at the properties that interest you. In general, reading is much faster than for mechanical HD. Also seek time is nil. And read power consumption is low. A serious contender for use in servers where lots of unchanging data is needed quickly. Probably not as good of an idea for use in a mail server, but ideal for a web server. -- David Kelly N4HHE, dkelly@HiWAAY.net ======================================================================== Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad.