From: Steve Clark scl...@netwolves.com
Unfortunately when I try it on SL 6.0 hdparm gets a segment
Hmmm sector still had random data after rm tmpfile and sync;
If SL 6.0 does not support it, I wonder if CentOS 6.0 (or even RH) will...
damn. :/
Guess you have no option to test it with
Hmmm sector still had random data after rm tmpfile and sync;
/dev/sda3 on / type ext4 (rw,noatime,nodiratime,discard)
Device Model: KINGSTON SS100S216G
Serial Number: 16GB40013421
Firmware Version: D100719
Suppose to support TRIM.
Just so you know, in Jan '09 there was a
On Thu, 26 May 2011, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
So having SSD in laptop (if they are unreliable) is not much of an
option, unless I am going to carry duplicate HDD/SSD just in case this
one crashes.
I'd argue that's just one of the risks you run with a laptop. In a laptop
you've typically
John Hodrien wrote:
On Thu, 26 May 2011, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
So having SSD in laptop (if they are unreliable) is not much of an
option, unless I am going to carry duplicate HDD/SSD just in case this
one crashes.
I'd argue that's just one of the risks you run with a laptop. In a
From: aurfal...@gmail.com aurfal...@gmail.com
In Windows and OSX its easy to get TRIM working, does any know of TRIM
for linux?
You apparently need a 2.6.33+ kernel (I read somewhere RH backported what was
needed to their 2.6.32) and an fs like ext4 or brtfs.
Read some people giving advice
On 05/27/2011 05:29 AM, John Doe wrote:
From: aurfal...@gmail.comaurfal...@gmail.com
In Windows and OSX its easy to get TRIM working, does any know of TRIM
for linux?
You apparently need a 2.6.33+ kernel (I read somewhere RH backported what was
needed to their 2.6.32) and an fs like ext4 or
From: Steve Clark scl...@netwolves.com
On 05/27/2011 05:29 AM, John Doe wrote:
Test =
https://sites.google.com/site/lightrush/random-1/checkiftrimonext4isenabledandworking
Tested on Fedora (15) and it worked.
Hmmm How do you determine whether TRIM worked or not?
See the link.
JD
On 5/26/2011 8:04 AM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
John Hodrien wrote:
On Thu, 26 May 2011, Emmanuel Noobadmin wrote:
Personally, I'm averse to using SSD with any important long term data
is the nightmare that I could one day wake up to find everything gone
without any means of recovery.
On 05/27/2011 08:28 AM, John Doe wrote:
From: Steve Clarkscl...@netwolves.com
On 05/27/2011 05:29 AM, John Doe wrote:
Test =
https://sites.google.com/site/lightrush/random-1/checkiftrimonext4isenabledandworking
Tested on Fedora (15) and it worked.
Hmmm How do you determine whether TRIM
From: Steve Clark scl...@netwolves.com
Unfortunately when I try it on SL 6.0 hdparm gets a segment
violation on the --read-sector command.
The fedora one is 9.36
And the one we used on CentOS 5.6 was 9.37 (compiled it).
Maybe try a more recent version...
JD
On 05/27/2011 10:04 AM, John Doe wrote:
From: Steve Clarkscl...@netwolves.com
Unfortunately when I try it on SL 6.0 hdparm gets a segment
violation on the --read-sector command.
The fedora one is 9.36
And the one we used on CentOS 5.6 was 9.37 (compiled it).
Maybe try a more recent
On 5/26/11, Kevin K kevi...@fidnet.com wrote:
Though thumb drives are flash, they tend to use a slower flash than what is
used in hard drive replacement units.
No actual industry facts for this, but I think the Flash used in thumb
drives are not really any slower by nature/design. This is
On Thu, 26 May 2011, Timothy Murphy wrote:
But I'm generally puzzled by the emphasis many people put on speed.
Unless one is a gamer, it doesn't seem to me to make much difference
if it takes 13 second or 30 seconds to boot up.
Either way it is going to take the same time to get to an URL.
On 5/26/11, John Hodrien j.h.hodr...@leeds.ac.uk wrote:
Spinning disks seem an awful lot like victorian technology taken too far.
In
the long term, what's *not* to like about the idea of fully solid state
storage?
Personally, I'm averse to using SSD with any important long term data
is the
On 5/26/11, Kevin K kevi...@fidnet.com wrote:
Though thumb drives are flash, they tend to use a slower flash than what
is
used in hard drive replacement units.
No actual industry facts for this, but I think the Flash used in thumb
drives are not really any slower by nature/design. This is
On Thu, 26 May 2011, Emmanuel Noobadmin wrote:
Personally, I'm averse to using SSD with any important long term data
is the nightmare that I could one day wake up to find everything gone
without any means of recovery. Compared that to a hard disk, which
barring catastrophic physical damage, I
John Hodrien wrote:
On Thu, 26 May 2011, Emmanuel Noobadmin wrote:
Personally, I'm averse to using SSD with any important long term data
is the nightmare that I could one day wake up to find everything gone
without any means of recovery. Compared that to a hard disk, which
barring
On Thu, 26 May 2011, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
Unless you are away on important business trip and you loose your system
just minutes before the meeting. Yes, it can happen to regular HDD, it's
much lesser probability for now.
If I'm going to a meeting where I've got documents I need, they'll
John Hodrien wrote:
On Thu, 26 May 2011, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
Unless you are away on important business trip and you loose your system
just minutes before the meeting. Yes, it can happen to regular HDD, it's
much lesser probability for now.
If I'm going to a meeting where I've got
On May 26, 2011, at 3:36 AM, Emmanuel Noobadmin wrote:
On 5/26/11, Kevin K kevi...@fidnet.com wrote:
Though thumb drives are flash, they tend to use a slower flash than what is
used in hard drive replacement units.
No actual industry facts for this, but I think the Flash used in thumb
On May 26, 2011, at 3:49 AM, Emmanuel Noobadmin wrote:
On 5/26/11, John Hodrien j.h.hodr...@leeds.ac.uk wrote:
Spinning disks seem an awful lot like victorian technology taken too far.
In
the long term, what's *not* to like about the idea of fully solid state
storage?
Personally, I'm
On May 26, 2011, at 8:12 AM, John Hodrien wrote:
On Thu, 26 May 2011, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
Unless you are away on important business trip and you loose your system
just minutes before the meeting. Yes, it can happen to regular HDD, it's
much lesser probability for now.
If I'm
On May 26, 2011, at 4:36 PM, Kevin K wrote:
On May 26, 2011, at 3:49 AM, Emmanuel Noobadmin wrote:
On 5/26/11, John Hodrien j.h.hodr...@leeds.ac.uk wrote:
Spinning disks seem an awful lot like victorian technology taken
too far.
In
the long term, what's *not* to like about the idea of
On 5/26/11, Simon Matter simon.mat...@invoca.ch wrote:
On 5/26/11, Kevin K kevi...@fidnet.com wrote:
Though thumb drives are flash, they tend to use a slower flash than what
is
used in hard drive replacement units.
No actual industry facts for this, but I think the Flash used in thumb
On Tue, 24 May 2011, Kevin K wrote:
To: CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org
From: Kevin K kevi...@fidnet.com
Subject: Re: [CentOS] SSD for Centos SWAP /tmp /var/ partition
On May 24, 2011, at 10:25 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
But don't you think that a SSD, or rather Solid State Drive
To bad I don't make purchasing decisions at work, or I would like a SSD for my
Linux system, probably to be upgraded to 6 later in the year.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Wed, 25 May 2011, Kevin K wrote:
To: CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org
From: Kevin K kevi...@fidnet.com
Subject: Re: [CentOS] SSD for Centos SWAP /tmp /var/ partition
To bad I don't make purchasing decisions at work, or I
would like a SSD for my Linux system, probably
On 5/24/11, Benjamin Franz jfr...@freerun.com wrote:
On 05/24/2011 08:25 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
I know you get some USB type SSD's, but people still refer to them as
SSD drives, and not USB drives
The correct way to describe it is 'a SSD drive *with a USB interface*'
or 'a SSD drive *with a
On May 25, 2011, at 3:28 PM, Emmanuel Noobadmin wrote:
I don't know... SSD drive with a USB interface sounds a big
mouthful... most people I know just call thumb drives :D
Though thumb drives are flash, they tend to use a slower flash than what is
used in hard drive replacement units. I
Thomas Harold wrote:
I've read most of the articles in this thread,
and I haven't seen anything that persuades me
SSD would be a good investment in my case,
either in servers or laptops.
*whistles* If you have not tried out a SSD laptop or desktop then you're
in for a big surprise.
On 05/23/2011 12:24 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
yes,butt SSD has to erase and write a LARGE block all at once, so
they don't do so well with the sorts of 8k random writes that write
intensive applications like relational databases commonly perform.
Many SSD are faster at writing even to
On 23 May 2011 11:04, John Hodrien j.h.hodr...@leeds.ac.uk wrote:
On Mon, 23 May 2011, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
Doesn't SATA and SAS drives also wear out?
Not in such a clear way related to usage. You could have a SATA disk that you
write to 24 hours a day and it could last for years. With an
On 5/23/2011 7:42 PM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 1:30 AM, Kevin K kevi...@fidnet.com wrote:
A SSD drive can be a SATA drive. SATA is the connection/protocol between
the drive and the computer.
Not quite. SATA is a type of drive, same as IDE / ATA, SCSI, SATA :)
SATA is
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 3:51 PM, Bowie Bailey bowie_bai...@buc.com wrote:
On 5/23/2011 7:42 PM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 1:30 AM, Kevin K kevi...@fidnet.com wrote:
A SSD drive can be a SATA drive. SATA is the connection/protocol between
the drive and the computer.
Not
On 5/24/2011 10:05 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 3:51 PM, Bowie Bailey bowie_bai...@buc.com wrote:
On 5/23/2011 7:42 PM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 1:30 AM, Kevin K kevi...@fidnet.com wrote:
A SSD drive can be a SATA drive. SATA is the connection/protocol
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 4:22 PM, Bowie Bailey bowie_bai...@buc.com wrote:
On 5/24/2011 10:05 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 3:51 PM, Bowie Bailey bowie_bai...@buc.com wrote:
On 5/23/2011 7:42 PM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 1:30 AM, Kevin K kevi...@fidnet.com
On Tue, 24 May 2011, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
But don't you think that a SSD, or rather Solid State Drive, would
still be seen as a different type of drive than a SATA drive, even
though they share the same type of bus connector + power cable?
A SATA SSD is different to a SATA HDD. Yes. And the
On 5/24/2011 11:25 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 4:22 PM, Bowie Bailey bowie_bai...@buc.com wrote:
Personally, I would call it an SATA HDD vs an SATA SSD. The same would
be true of a SCSI HDD vs a SCSI SSD.
At the moment, if you say SATA drive, most people will understand
On 05/24/2011 08:25 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
But don't you think that a SSD, or rather Solid State Drive, would
still be seen as a different type of drive than a SATA drive, even
though they share the same type of bus connector + power cable?
Interface and media type are completely
--On Monday, May 23, 2011 05:05:38 PM -0700 R - elists
list...@abbacomm.net wrote:
what specific units are considered server grade ssd's ?
What you want to look for in your drive specs are the acronyms
SLC and MLC.
SLC is enterprise grade, smaller capacity, expensive
MLC is consumer
On 05/24/11 9:36 AM, Devin Reade wrote:
--On Monday, May 23, 2011 05:05:38 PM -0700 R - elists
list...@abbacomm.net wrote:
what specific units are considered server grade ssd's ?
What you want to look for in your drive specs are the acronyms
SLC and MLC.
SLC is enterprise grade,
On 05/24/2011 09:57 AM, John R Pierce wrote:
also you want SSD that has a supercap on its internal cache so pending
writes aren't lost in a power failure scenario.
You know, I've asked people about that in the past since the whole block
read/erase/write cycle seems like a risk in the event of
If you're referring to capacitors, I do not believe modern SSD's used
those. Or at least ones I've seen didn't (that I recall).
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Gordon Messmer yiny...@eburg.com wrote:
On 05/24/2011 09:57 AM, John R Pierce wrote:
also you want SSD that has a supercap on its
On 05/24/11 10:32 AM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 05/24/2011 09:57 AM, John R Pierce wrote:
also you want SSD that has a supercap on its internal cache so pending
writes aren't lost in a power failure scenario.
You know, I've asked people about that in the past since the whole block
On 05/24/2011 02:01 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
On 05/24/11 10:32 AM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 05/24/2011 09:57 AM, John R Pierce wrote:
also you want SSD that has a supercap on its internal cache so pending
writes aren't lost in a power failure scenario.
You know, I've asked people about
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 8:01 PM, John R Pierce pie...@hogranch.com wrote:
(and, please folks, UPS's are great, but they fail too, you can't rely
on them for data protection).
--
john r pierce N 37, W 123
santa cruz ca mid-left coast
On May 24, 2011, at 10:25 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
But don't you think that a SSD, or rather Solid State Drive, would
still be seen as a different type of drive than a SATA drive, even
though they share the same type of bus connector + power cable?
I know you get some USB type SSD's,
On May 24, 2011, at 11:40 AM, Bowie Bailey bowie_bai...@buc.com wrote:
On 5/24/2011 11:25 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 4:22 PM, Bowie Bailey bowie_bai...@buc.com wrote:
Personally, I would call it an SATA HDD vs an SATA SSD. The same would
be true of a SCSI HDD vs a SCSI
On 5/22/11, yonatan pingle yonatan.pin...@gmail.com wrote:
the only way to go with SSD is RAID due to these reasons.
it's unlikely that two disks will die at the same time, so it's
possible to use and enjoy them ,
but don't forget to have a fresh backup and a raid array. ( that
should be done
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 6:18 PM, Gordon Messmer yiny...@eburg.com wrote:
On 05/20/2011 01:26 PM, Keith Roberts wrote:
I'm wondering if it would be a good idea to use a new SSD
for moving all the disk i/o to, that Linux likes to do so
often.
Just be aware that SSDs wear out. They have a
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Kevin Thorpe
kevin.tho...@pibenchmark.com wrote:
Just be aware that SSDs wear out. They have a limited number of write
cycles.
Nowadays they all do 'wear levelling' to even the writes across the drive
but
even so they don't last very long in heavy write
On Mon, 23 May 2011, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
Doesn't SATA and SAS drives also wear out?
Not in such a clear way related to usage. You could have a SATA disk that you
write to 24 hours a day and it could last for years. With an SSD, you'd be
certain to kill your disk in months if you treated it
yonatan pingle wrote:
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 2:06 PM, Keith Roberts
anyways - if it's for home usage Don't think twice get an SSD .
Why?
I've read most of the articles in this thread,
and I haven't seen anything that persuades me
SSD would be a good investment in my case,
either in servers
On Sun, 22 May 2011, Gordon Messmer wrote:
To: CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org
From: Gordon Messmer yiny...@eburg.com
Subject: Re: [CentOS] SSD for Centos SWAP /tmp /var/ partition
On 05/20/2011 01:26 PM, Keith Roberts wrote:
I'm wondering if it would be a good idea to use a new SSD
Keith,
On Friday, May 20, 2011 you wrote:
I'm wondering if it would be a good idea to use a new SSD
for moving all the disk i/o to, that Linux likes to do so
often. Plus putting SWAP onto a decent SSD should speed
things up somewhat.
As far as I understand, SSD are fast at reading and
On Mon, 23 May 2011, Michael Schumacher wrote:
To: CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org
From: Michael Schumacher michael.schumac...@pamas.de
Subject: Re: [CentOS] SSD for Centos SWAP /tmp /var/ partition
Keith,
On Friday, May 20, 2011 you wrote:
I'm wondering if it would be a good
Here, we are waiting for CentOS 6 for the discard (trim) option from the new
kernel...
Also, RedHat has some advices:
http://docs.redhat.com/docs/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/6/html/Storage_Administration_Guide/newmds-ssdtuning.html
JD
___
CentOS
On 05/23/2011 01:22 AM, Emmanuel Noobadmin wrote:
If I'm not mistakened, one issue with using SSD was limited write
cycles of the cells? So two SSD used for repeated rewrite operations
would likely die around the same time, wouldn't they?
An SLC drive with wear leveling should last far longer
On 05/23/2011 02:31 AM, Kevin Thorpe wrote:
Just be aware that SSDs wear out. They have a limited number of write
cycles. Nowadays they all do 'wear levelling' to even the writes
across the drive but even so they don't last very long in heavy write
usage.
Yes, there's a limit number of
On 05/23/2011 09:39 AM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 05/23/2011 02:31 AM, Kevin Thorpe wrote:
Just be aware that SSDs wear out. They have a limited number of write
cycles. Nowadays they all do 'wear levelling' to even the writes
across the drive but even so they don't last very long in heavy
Jerry Franz wrote:
On 05/23/2011 09:39 AM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 05/23/2011 02:31 AM, Kevin Thorpe wrote:
Just be aware that SSDs wear out. They have a limited number of write
cycles. Nowadays they all do 'wear levelling' to even the writes
across the drive but even so they don't last
On 05/23/2011 07:23 AM, Michael Schumacher wrote:
As far as I understand, SSD are fast at reading and slow at writing.
A good SSD will be substantially faster at writes than a disk drive, as
well. Because there's no head seeking around a platter, latency is
vastly better, which provides a
On Mon, 23 May 2011, Jerry Franz wrote:
*snip*
However, SSD drive reliability itself has been very poor in the field.
The failure rate is obscene.
See Jeff Atwood's 'The Hot/Crazy Solid State Drive Scale':
URL:http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2011/05/the-hot-crazy-solid-state-drive-scale.html
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 12:29 AM, yonatan pingle
yonatan.pin...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Keith
not sure about OCZ reliability for production , but i can confirm
Intel x-25 drives work great with centos ( about 11 month's now ).
I use two drives as /var in md mirror , using it for SQL and logs -
On 05/23/2011 11:01 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
Now, the question is, is is there any way to tell EXT3/4 to use a
separate drive as a cache drive for the same purpose? OR, how about
telling CentOS to use a separate drive for caching purposes in the
same way?
You can use an external journal on a
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Jerry Franz jfr...@freerun.com wrote:
On 05/23/2011 11:01 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
Now, the question is, is is there any way to tell EXT3/4 to use a
separate drive as a cache drive for the same purpose? OR, how about
telling CentOS to use a separate drive for
On 05/23/11 9:54 AM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 05/23/2011 07:23 AM, Michael Schumacher wrote:
As far as I understand, SSD are fast at reading and slow at writing.
A good SSD will be substantially faster at writes than a disk drive, as
well. Because there's no head seeking around a platter,
On 05/23/2011 01:44 PM, Jerry Franz wrote:
But, for paranoia's sake, I would RAID1 the SSD with a second SSD.
Quote from
http://docs.redhat.com/docs/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/6/html/Storage_Administration_Guide/newmds-ssdtuning.html
:
Red Hat also warns that software RAID levels
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 02:29:22PM -0500, Robert Nichols wrote:
On 05/23/2011 01:44 PM, Jerry Franz wrote:
But, for paranoia's sake, I would RAID1 the SSD with a second SSD.
Quote from
On Mon, 23 May 2011, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
*snip*
ZFS can use a SATA, SAS or SSD drive as cache drive to speed up common
reads writes. I have seen some small improvements even when using a
cheaper grade SATA SAS drive (as part of an experiment). The speed
improvement is quite a bit more evident
On Mon, 23 May 2011, John R Pierce wrote:
To: centos@centos.org
From: John R Pierce pie...@hogranch.com
Subject: Re: [CentOS] SSD for Centos SWAP /tmp /var/ partition
On 05/23/11 9:54 AM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 05/23/2011 07:23 AM, Michael Schumacher wrote:
As far as I understand, SSD
On Mon, 23 May 2011, Ray Van Dolson wrote:
To: centos@centos.org
From: Ray Van Dolson ra...@bludgeon.org
Subject: Re: [CentOS] SSD for Centos SWAP /tmp /var/ partition
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 02:29:22PM -0500, Robert Nichols wrote:
On 05/23/2011 01:44 PM, Jerry Franz wrote
On 05/23/11 12:45 PM, Keith Roberts wrote:
Would a defrag program work on a SSD?
for some values of 'work'.as its completely unaware of the internal
block remapping of the SSD, all it would really do would be to churn the
data around.
I've read the only way to reset the block remapping on
On 05/23/2011 12:27 PM, Ray Van Dolson wrote:
Quote from
http://docs.redhat.com/docs/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/6/html/Storage_Administration_Guide/newmds-ssdtuning.html
:
Red Hat also warns that software RAID levels 1, 4, 5, and 6 are not
recommended for use on SSDs. During
On May 23, 2011, at 4:48 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Kevin Thorpe
kevin.tho...@pibenchmark.com wrote:
Just be aware that SSDs wear out. They have a limited number of write
cycles.
Nowadays they all do 'wear levelling' to even the writes across the drive
but
Do note that the server-grade SSDs are far more reliable than
the consumer-grade crap.
mark
mark,
what specific units are considered server grade ssd's ?
have you bought and used them with CentOS? other opsys ?
where are you sourcing and what are you paying?
- rh
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 1:30 AM, Kevin K kevi...@fidnet.com wrote:
On May 23, 2011, at 4:48 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Kevin Thorpe
kevin.tho...@pibenchmark.com wrote:
Just be aware that SSDs wear out. They have a limited number of write
cycles.
Nowadays they
A SSD drive can be a SATA drive. SATA is the connection/protocol between
the drive and the computer.
Not quite. SATA is a type of drive, same as IDE / ATA, SCSI, SATA :)
I disagree. :)
IDE/ATA, SATA, SAS, SCSI are all just interfaces. The underlying
media, whether spinning rust or MLC/SLC
On 5/23/2011 7:03 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
yonatan pingle wrote:
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 2:06 PM, Keith Roberts
anyways - if it's for home usage Don't think twice get an SSD .
Why?
I've read most of the articles in this thread,
and I haven't seen anything that persuades me
SSD would be
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 2:40 AM, Steven Crothers
steven.croth...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 6:29 PM, yonatan pingle
yonatan.pin...@gmail.com wrote:
if you use the SSD for swap, don't put anything important on them, I
have managed to destroy a drive which was used for heavy swap
I was running on 3gbps sata bus, and the performance was great, it
just dies in one big crash without giving any clues about it.
If only SSD's were a viable solution for long-term storage, we could
theoretically increase our virtualization many times over. It's to bad
the technology hasn't
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 10:57 AM, Steven Crothers
steven.croth...@gmail.com wrote:
I was running on 3gbps sata bus, and the performance was great, it
just dies in one big crash without giving any clues about it.
If only SSD's were a viable solution for long-term storage, we could
On Sun, 22 May 2011, yonatan pingle wrote:
To: CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org
From: yonatan pingle yonatan.pin...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [CentOS] SSD for Centos SWAP /tmp /var/ partition
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 10:57 AM, Steven Crothers
steven.croth...@gmail.com wrote:
I was running
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 2:06 PM, Keith Roberts ke...@karsites.net wrote:
On Sun, 22 May 2011, yonatan pingle wrote:
To: CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org
From: yonatan pingle yonatan.pin...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [CentOS] SSD for Centos SWAP /tmp /var/ partition
On Sun, May 22, 2011
On 05/20/2011 01:26 PM, Keith Roberts wrote:
I'm wondering if it would be a good idea to use a new SSD
for moving all the disk i/o to, that Linux likes to do so
often.
Yes, it's often a really good idea. If you're doing software RAID on
Linux, you really should either disable disk drives'
On Sat, 21 May 2011, Eero Volotinen wrote:
To: CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org
From: Eero Volotinen eero.voloti...@iki.fi
Subject: Re: [CentOS] SSD for Centos SWAP /tmp /var/ partition
2011/5/20 Keith Roberts ke...@karsites.net:
Has anyone actually used a SSD in a Centos setup
...@karsites.net wrote:
On Sat, 21 May 2011, Eero Volotinen wrote:
To: CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org
From: Eero Volotinen eero.voloti...@iki.fi
Subject: Re: [CentOS] SSD for Centos SWAP /tmp /var/ partition
2011/5/20 Keith Roberts ke...@karsites.net:
Has anyone actually used a SSD
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 10:21 PM, Eero Volotinen eero.voloti...@iki.fi wrote:
Just buy fastest ocz drive than you can find from stores.
--
Eero
Simply buying OCZ because its cheap is wrong. OCZ drives use MLC
flash, I'm sure you know the difference between single level cells and
multiple
On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 6:29 PM, yonatan pingle
yonatan.pin...@gmail.com wrote:
if you use the SSD for swap, don't put anything important on them, I
have managed to destroy a drive which was used for heavy swap
operations.
(insane experiment with KVM virtual machines got to that situation ).
It's really neat when an OCZ drive fails, it doesn't tick. You just
lose all your data. Here today, gone tomorrow.
Just swap drive and restore from backup, no problem ?
--
Eero
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
That's expensive, don't know about you but I don't factor in drives to
be dead within 3-4 months of installation for my machines. Running
swap on an MLC SSD will most definitely kill it in 3-4 months. You
expect to get at least 18-36 months out of a drive before it either
dies or requires an
Has anyone actually used a SSD in a Centos setup?
My little experiment with a s/h WD drive for /tmp and SWAP
partitions kicked the bucket on Wednesday, when the poor WD
drive caught the click-of-death. It was a s/h drive
to start with and lasted about 4 months. But that was
without the
2011/5/20 Keith Roberts ke...@karsites.net:
Has anyone actually used a SSD in a Centos setup?
Yes.
I'm wondering if it would be a good idea to use a new SSD
for moving all the disk i/o to, that Linux likes to do so
often. Plus putting SWAP onto a decent SSD should speed
things up somewhat.
93 matches
Mail list logo
